{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1727","title":"Court filings: District Court, Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT) and Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS) motion to compel Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) compliance with Plan 2000, Section F (discipline)","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["2001-10-29"],"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","Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT)","Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS)","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Standards","Educational law and legislation","School discipline","School management and organization","School employees","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT) and Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS) motion to compel Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) compliance with Plan 2000, Section F (discipline)"],"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/1727"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["32 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"This transcript was create using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  / ~ :: ::~:.~\\; ~:::~:';, . SlJ~.~Y-i\\~4)i~ I , ~~ : .~~~ ~-  r FILED EA U.S. DISTRICT COURT STERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS OCT 2 ~ ZIJ1JI - U. S. DiSTR[CT JL'CCE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS oc f 2 9 2001 WESTERN DIVISION _~;MES W. McCORMACK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF DEP CLERK V. No. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHoorRECE~,.,eo DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KA THERINE KNIGHT, ET AL OCT 3 0 2001 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS PULASKI ASSOCIATION OF CLASSROOM TEACHERS {PACTI AND PULASKI ASSOCIATION OF SUPPORT STAFF {PASS) MOTION TO COMPEL PCSSD COMPLIANCE WITH PLAN 2000, SECTION F (DISCIPLINE) The Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers and The Pulaski Association of Support Staff, by and through their Attorneys, Roachell Law Firm, for their Motion to Compel, state: 1. They are Intervenors herein and have standing to bring this motion. 2. In its Order dated February 22, 2000, the Court approved conditionally Plan 2000 submitted by PCSSD and stated: 11  this Court will judge Plan 2000 with the expectations that PCSSD will implement the plan without delay, conscientiously and in all good faith. Should PCS SD fall short of these expectations, the Court will not hesitate to exercise its jurisdiction to compel compliance. 11 3. After repeated w~~s 1Jy PACT and PASS to the Board of Directors as well as to administrative officials, PCSSD has failed to comply with the Court's order and Section F of Plan 2000 as more fully set forth in the PACT and PASS Report and Attachments-PCSSD Desegregation Plan 2000-Section F (Discipline) attached hereto and - incorporated herein word for word as part of this motion. 5. The actions of the district in failing to comply with the Court approved plan 2000 continue from the date of the report to this date. 6. After hearing, the Court should order the district to forthwith comply with the Court's Orders with regard to Section F-Plan 2000 (Discipline) and consider such sanctions as may be appropriate. WHEREFORE, the Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers and the Pulaski Association of Support Staff pray that the Court order PCS SD to comply with Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000 as ordered by the Court; and that they may be granted all other relief to which they may be entitled. 2 Respectfully submitted: Richard W. Roachell ROACHELL LAW FIRM P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 (501) 224-1110 ~.c-::;..__ Richard W. Roachell (78132) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Richard W. Roachell, hereby state that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was mailed via U. S. Mail on this ____ day of October, 2001 to the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated. Mr. John Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 7220 I Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon, \u0026 Jones, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Mark Hagemeier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor I Union National Plaz.a 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Mr. John C. Fendley, Jr. Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Richard W. Roachell (78132) 3 Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers and Pulaski Association of Support Staff Report \u0026 Attachments PCSSD Desegregation Plan 2000 - Section F (Discipline) July 2001 As Knight Intervenors, the Pulaski Association of Classroom Teachers (PACT) and the Pulaski Association of Support Staff (PASS) contend that the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) has failed to implement, in a timely manner, the terms outlined in Section F (Discipline) of the PCSSD Desegregation Plan 2000 and, in doing so, has delayed its obligation to bring parity and equity to the discipline administered to both black and white students in the District. This report and attachments are being submitted after efforts by PACT and PASS to make the PCS SD aware that the implementation of Section F (Discipline) has been unsuccessful. INTRODUCTION For several years, PACT and PASS have voiced concerns regarding the inconsistencies in administering discipline to PCSSD students. Teachers became very optimistic in November of 1999 when the PCSSD approved a new desegregation plan that was more process-oriented in the area of discipline; a desegregation plan that would examine all facets of discipline in PCSSD. The Court approved the PCSSD Desegregation Plan 2000 on February 22, 2000. The discipline provisions, as outlined in Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000, addressed many teacher concerns regarding discipline in the PCSSD schools and contained tirnelines for completion and/or implementation. The specific terms of Section F (Discipline) are as follows: Paragraph 1 initiated the process that was to fully assess the District's efforts to eliminate racial disparities in the imposition of discipline. This involved maintaining discipline records on all students and collecting the relevant data. Paragraph 2 called for the PCSSD to develop criteria for identifying: (i/ teachers and other staff members who are experiencing problems which require attention; (ii) schools which have atypically high discipline rates; and (iii) schools which have atypically high racial disparities in discipline. PCSSD was to submit this information to the Joshua Intervenors no later than 45 days after Court approval of Plan 2000 (May 5, 2000). Paragraph 3 required the PCSSD to provide assistance to school personnel identified by the criteria outlined in Paragraph 2. Paragraph 4 called for the creation of a Discipline Study Panel to consider causes for the high rates of discipline for African-American students and possible 1 remedies. This included: reviewing discipline records; interviewing and/or surveying African-American students; and considering possible relationships between unmet academic needs and discipline rates. A written study was to be completed no later than 150 days after Court approval of Plan 2000 (August 18, 2000) and was to include suggested measures for prevention and intervention. Paragraph 5 required the PCSSD to develop a specific initiative to reduce the rates of discipline in the PCSSD shown in ODM's report dated March 18, 1998. This was to be implemented no later than 150 days after Court approval of Plan 2000 (August 18, 2000). Paragraph 6 required PCSSD to adhere to the policies set forth in its Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline. The fact that timelines were attached gave Plan 2000 credibility to teachers. PACT and PASS genuinely believed that, for the first time, the District would conduct a full-scale review . of the discipline procedures in a serious and purposeful way, one that would eventually lead to better discipline in the classroom and fair and equitable treatment for students. However, the PCSSD has disregarded established timelines, misinterpreted key components, misrepresented the facts, and generally delayed its desegregation obligations as outlined in Section F (Discipline). DISREGARD FOR EST ABISHED TIMELINES Rather than anticipate Court approval of Plan 2000 and develop a preliminary schedule of meeting dates the way PCSSD did in its Middle School Conversion Plan, the PCSSD chose to wait until the week prior to the August 9, 2000 hearing before the Court to even begin compliance efforts for Section F (Discipline). This was approximately nine (9) months after PCSSD approval of Plan 2000 and approximately five (5) months after Court approval of Plan 2000. By the time compliance efforts for Section F (Discipline) started on August 11 , 2000: 1) The 45-day timeline for developing criteria and submitting it to Joshua as outlined in paragraph 2 had passed; 2) The timeline, as outlined in paragraph 4, for completing a written study on the work done by the Discipline Study Panel (a panel that had not even begun any of its work) was within one (1) week of passing; and 3) The timeline for implementing the specific initiative outlined in paragraph 5 was within one ( 1) week of passing. Once compliance with Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000 was actually initiated by the PCSSD there was nothing organized or deliberate about its efforts. There was no discipline data relevant to the in-depth study that was to be conducted, and the Discipline Study Panel that was convened on August 11, 2000 could not do any of its work until paragraphs 1 and 2 of Section F (Discipline) had been completed. Moreover, the charge of the Discipline Study Panel changed with every meeting, as did the make-up of the group. The charge went from \"conducting a comprehensive study on the disciplining of African-American students\" on August 11, 2000, to 2 \"developing strategies and criteria to eliminate racial disparities in discipline\" on September 8, 2000, to \"discussing proposed methods for determining racial disparity in discipline and identifying teachers and staff who are experiencing problems which require attention\" on October 31, 2000, to \"establishing criteria for identifying i, ii, and iii in paragraph 2\" on November 9, 2000, to \"continue criteria development\" on November 16, 2000. The charge of the Panel changed like the wind to the point that members of the Panel, themselves, were confused as to what they were actually there to do. CHRONOLOGICAL ACCOUNT OF CORRESPONDENCE AND EVENTS (Misinterpretation of Key Components of Plan 2000) (Misrepresentation of the Facts) August 4, 2000 August 11, 2000 August 14, 2000 Memo from Dr. Ruth Herts, Director of Equity, to teachers stating that the first meeting date of the Discipline Study Panel would be August 11, 2000. An excerpt from Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000 that pertained to the work of the Panel was included with the memo. Letter from Attorney John Walker to Eddie Collins, Assistant Superintendent for Pupil Personnel, stating that Joshua would not be able to effectively participate in the August 11, 2000 meeting of the Discipline Study Panel for several reasons, one of which was \"the predicate basis of the work of the discipline study committee [sic] had not been provided.\" First meeting of the Discipline Study Panel as described in paragraph 4 of Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000. Dr. Herts provided an agenda for the meeting. The first four items on the agenda were discussed, including the purpose/charge of the Panel as outlined in F (4). Mr. Walker informed the Panel that the District waited too late to get started and that he would file a Contempt of Court Motion. When asked why the District had waited so long to get started, Mr. Collins responded by saying, \"The Superintendent wanted to wait until the new Assistant Superintendent for Equity and Pupil Services was on board.\" The Panel passed a motion to discontinue the meetings until such time as all parties could participate. Memo from Dr. Herts regarding correspondence to Eddie Collins from the Joshua Intervenors urging the PCSSD to respond to requests by Joshua as a \"matter of good faith effort on the part of the District.\" Memo from Karl Brown, Assistant Superintendent of Equity \u0026 Pupil Services, stating that the next meeting of the Discipline Study Panel would be August 24, 2000. 3 August 21, 2000 Memo from PACT President, Deen Minton, stating that the teachers on the Panel would not be able to attend the August 24, 2000 meeting. This was on the fourth day of school and teachers wanted and needed to be in their classrooms early into a new school year in order to \"set the tone\" for the year. August 28, 2000 Memo from PACT President, Deen Minton, to Karl Brown stating that the teachers on the Panel would not be able to attend a September 8, 2000 meeting. Teachers wanted and needed to be in their classrooms for SAT-9 preparation and testing. August 29, 2000 Memo from Karl Brown to Discipline Study Panel members noting that the August 24, 2000 meeting was officially rescheduled for September 8, 2000. The statecl purpose of the meeting was '\"to develop strategies and criteria to eliminate racial disparities in discipline in the District.\" September 8, 2000 Meeting with administrator representatives on the Discipline Study Panel and Margie Powell of ODM. September 14, 2000 Memo from Dr. Welch, Director of Pupil Services \u0026 Athletics, to members of the Discipline  Study Panel stating that the next meeting was October 3, 2000. Minutes from the September 8, 2000 meeting stated that '\"this committee [sic] is charged with completing an assessment of the objective of eliminating racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline\" and that \"this committee [sic] also has the responsibility to review discipline records and conduct an interview and/or survey with AfricanAmerican students regarding their experiences in the system in general and in the discipline process in particular.\" The minutes also reflected that consensus was reached on several paragraphs in Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000; however, this was a consensus reached at a meeting with only the administrative representatives from the Panel present. September 15, 2000 Memorandum #A-00-035-R from Superintendent Smith, Karl Brown, and Dr. Clowers, Director of Accountability, to all principals revising the collection of data procedures for Section F (Discipline), paragraph 1 of Plan 2000. (a) The memo states that \"specific proposals have been sent to the Joshua Intervenors that specify criteria, data collection, . and analysis methodology to address Section F (Discipline), part 2, subsections i and iii of the Plan.\" The memo disregarded item ii altogether and further specified that the very criteria the Panel was charged with developing had 4 October 3, 2000 supposedly already been sent to Joshua. PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel had no knowledge of, and certainly no input into anything sent to Joshua. (b) This memo identifies \"principals or other administrative staff' in the definition of \"staff member\" as outlined in Plan 2000. Even though the memo referred to administrators as \"staff members,\" the criteria and analysis methodology used solely targeted teachers. The memo implies administrators are included as staff members as per Plan 2000; however, the fact is that they are not. ( c) Attachments to this memo contained a page entitled \"Reason Codes\" and one entitled \"Response Codes.\" Reason codes are the reasons students are disciplined and should correspond to the rules in the Handbook/or Student Conduct and Discipline. Response codes are the actions that administrators take when a rule has been broken and should correspond to the consequences outlined in the Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline. These codes do not align with those in the Handbook, thus making data collection using these codes flawed and rendering the data itself useless. Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. No agenda provided. There was an objection made by PACT and PASS because the make-up of the Panel had changed from the August 11, 2000 initial meeting (two more administrators were present). Panel members inspected a 378-page document titled, \"Activity Tracker Detail Report.\" This was a detailed account of each student's discipline data for the 1999-2000 school year. While reviewing this report, it was noticed that many rule numbers listed did not correlate to those in the Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline. In other words, students were being suspended for breaking rules that were not delineated in the PCSSD's discipline policies as set forth in the Handbook. Panel members stated that the Computer Center should make sure that all rule numbers and consequences align with the District's policies as described in Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline, since this is the docwnent that parents and students must sign for every year. The PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel requested to review all referrals written and to be provided with a breakdown of suspensions by rule number violated/gender/race. The Panel was told that there was not enough room to hold all the referrals written and that there were problems with the \"people downstairs\" in that 5 October 12, 2000 October 23, 2000 October 31, 2000 November 9, 2000 they were having trouble getting data from the Computer Center. PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel stated that without the requested data, the Panel could not do what it was responsible for doing. Mr. Brown responded by saying, \"We are out of compliance anyway, so there's no need to rush.\" Dr. Welch sent copies of PCSSD Annual Disciplinary Report Summaries for 1997-98, 1998-99, and 1999-00 to the members of the Discipline Study Panel. These reports did not contain a breakdown of suspensions by rule number/race/gender as requested. Memo# A-00-081 from Dr. Welch to members of the Discipline Study Panel stating that the next meeting was October 31, 2000. Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. Agenda provided. Mr. John Walker and Ms. Joy Springer attended part of the meeting. Mr. Walker stated that it was the District's responsibility, not the Panel's, to develop and submit to Joshua the criteria for identifying teachers and other staff experiencing problems and schools with high discipline rates. He stated that this had not been done. Dr. Clowers said that he had talked to Sam Jones and that the criteria and method used for evaluating the criteria had been sent to Joshua on August 29, 2000. Before he left, Mr. Walker stated that the Panel was not to be administrator-controlled. Brenda Bowles, Coordinator for Multicultural Curriculum, stated that \"we\" could do paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of Section F (Discipline) and submit it to Joshua. No vote was taken. Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. Agenda provided. Dr. Welch was elected Chair of the Panel and Georgia Norris was elected as Recorder. The first item on the agenda was to establish criteria for identifying i, ii, and iii in paragraph 2 of Section F (Discipline). The Panel was now being asked to develop criteria that had already been sent to Joshua. (See Memorandum #A-00-035-R dated September 15, 2000 and October 31, 2000). Brenda Bowles prepared a \"Criteria\" sheet for identifying schools, based on discussions by the Panel. The Panel passed a motion that all rules must align with those in the Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline. PACT and PASS continued to stress the importance of aligning reason codes and response codes with the PCSSD's discipline policies set forth in the Handbook/or Student Conduct and Discipline. In order to conduct a comprehensive study on discipline, it is imperative to have complete and accurate data. Student disciplinary records must reflect the correct rule 6 that was broken and the actual discipline imposed in order to determine whether students are disciplined in a fair and equitable manner. PACT and PASS have no knowledge that an alignment of the codes with the Handbook bas yet occurred. Heated discussions centered on Dr. Clowers' method of identifying teachers and other staff members who are experiencing problems. Dr. Clowers interpreted this to mean ''those teachers and staff members who send atypically large numbers of students to a building administrator for disciplinary referral.\" The PACT and PASS representatives strongly disagreed with his interpretation and the formula he developed for several reasons: 1. The term \"problem\" needs to be clearly defined; 2. Dr. Clowers' formula creates an automatic bias against the teachers. It makes discipline problems appear to be the result of some failing on the part of the teacher and it singles-out teachers because teachers are the only ones who write disciplinary referrals. The Disciplinary Referral Form is the negotiated form used by teachers when excluding a student from class for disciplinary reasons. Although administrators are considered \"other staff members,\" they take action on the referral, they don't write it. Therefore, the administrator would never be identified as \"experiencing problems\" using Dr. Clowers' formula. 3. Teachers do not impose consequences for discipline (suspensions, Saturday school, expulsion, etc.), administrators do. Yet, nowhere in Dr. Clowers' formula are the building level administrator's actions on the referral taken into account or analyzed. 4. When reviewing a teacher's referrals, violations need to be categorized as \"classroom infractions\" versus \"other Handbook infractions\" because there are many infractions that are beyond a teacher's control (i.e., fighting, possessing a weapon, smoking, etc.). 5. It is unclear whether Dr. Clowers' formula actually identifies teachers who write atypically large numbers of referrals or who send atypically large numbers of students to the office. In either case, his method does not provide the data that is necessary to address the underlying intent of Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000, which is to eliminate racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline. 7 6. PCSSD 'Policy and the negotiated Master Contract hold teachers responsible for the behavior of students and expect that, \"when and where unacceptable behavior occurs to take appropriate action.\" This creates a Catch-22 situation for teachers. Teachers who are \"unable to assist the student to maintain proper controls of his behavior\" are to refer that student to the appropriate administrator using a Disciplinary Referral Form. However, for each referral form written, the teacher receives a \"tally mark.\" Too many '\u003ctally marks\" will result in a teacher being \"redflagged\" and identified as possibly having a problem with discipline. Administrators are using the '\u003ctally marks\" to intimidate teachers to not write referrals. While this intimidation might decrease the actual number of referrals written, thereby looking good on paper, the results are: 1) student discipline is not improved; 2) student misbehaviors are not corrected; and 3) disparities in discipline are not addressed. But, because the PCSSD can point to fewer referrals written, it once again can pat itself on the back for a job-well-done when in. fact, it has done absolutely nothing to address, much less achieve, its actual goal of eliminating racial disparities in the imposition of discipline. 7. The PACT and PASS believe that the inequities causing a disparity in discipline exist in the actions taken by the administrator, not in the number of referrals written by a teacher. This actual example was discussed at one of the Panel meetings to show that inequities in administrative actions do exist: Two male students, one black and one white, were both referred by a teacher for violating Rule #3. The teacher wrote two referrals; therefore she received two \"tally marks\". The administrator suspended one of the male students and only conferenced with the other. The inequity is in the consequence imposed, not in the number of referrals written. However, using Dr. Clowers' criteria and analysis methodology, these administrative actions are not recorded or analyzed anywhere. November 16, 2000 Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. No agenda provided. Dr. Welch told the Panel that there were still problems \"downstairs\" so the data that was requested was still not available. PACT and PASS requested that all principals in the District submit to the Panel ALL discipline forms, other than the negotiated referral form, that are being used in their buildings. The Panel needed to see what other forms individual building principals are requiring teachers to use to report discipline infractions in order to clarify how data was being collected. This inf orrnation was never 8 March 19, 2001 April 3, 2001 May 3, 2000 provided. The District continued to collect data from only one form when, in reality, some schools use other forms. Again this leads to inaccurate data collection. The Panel reviewed all referrals written at Sylvan Hills Jr. High throughout the 1999-2000 school year to get an understanding of how consequences were administered. It was stated that the next meeting would be the last week of November or the first week of December. Dr. Welch would notify Committee members when it would be. Memo from Dr. Welch stating that the next meeting of the Discipline Study Panel would be on April 3, 2001, approximately four ( 4) months after the Panel said it would next meet. Meeting of the Discipline Study Panel. No agenda provided. Dr. Welch gave Panel members a seven-page document containing the six (6) paragraphs of Section F (Discipline) indicating responsibilities, specific tasks, etc., and a discipline data collection grid. Dr. Welch stated that the criteria that would be sent to Joshua would be \"that little grid coupled with Clowers' formula for identifying schools as significant or not significant.\" It was agreed that no names would ever be released; however, identification of teachers was not discussed. Discussion centered on each school's Equity Monitoring Team reviewing school data for item iii of paragraph 2. No vote was taken. The Computer Center complied with the October 3, 2000 request for a breakdown of suspensions by rule number, gender, and race. Dr. Welch had only one copy of this report titled, \"SAS System Breakdown by Rule/Gender/Race.\" He stated that he would send each Panel member a copy later. Panel members have yet to receive their copies. Dr. Welch generated a status report on the progress of the Discipline Study Panel. This report stated that, \"At the April 3, 2001 meeting of the Discipline Panel, it was agreed to go forward with the following proposal as agreed to by the Panel\" and that the Panel worked together to develop criteria for Section F (Discipline), paragraph 2, subsections i, ii, and iii in Plan 2000. It was further stated that these criteria had been \"agreed upon\" by the Panel. Much of the material contained in this report is false. The Panel did not agree to Dr. Clowers' criteria or his formula for identifying \"teachers and other staff members experiencing problems which require attention.\" PACT and PASS representatives repeatedly stated, for the record, that the Knight Intervenors reserved the right to submit a separate report. The 9 May 7, 2001 Panel did not disagree with the use of Dr. Clowers' method of identifying schools with high discipline rates and high racial disparities. Dr. Clowers explained that a school would be identified as \"significant\" or \"not significant\" using a statistical calculation known as a \"large-sample confidence interval for the difference of two proportions.\" The criteria for identifying schools as \"significant\" or \"not significant\" was discussed in detail. This report was presented to the PCSSD School Board at its May Board Meeting. At this School Board meeting the PACT President pointed out to the School Board which parts of the report were inaccurate or misleading and expressed PACT and PASS concerns with the Discipline Study Panel and with the implementation of Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000. PACT and PASS Panel members received another report, dated May 7, 2001, on June 7, 2001. This report contained some infonnation that was never even discussed in any of the Discipline Study Panel meetings. The material, which was sent to Karl Brown by Dr .. Welch, regarded Plan 2000 Discipline Criteria. This packet of material contained three (3) separate documents, prepared by Dr. Clowers, describing the criteria and procedures that he was going to use to address Section F (Discipline), item 2, subsections i, ii, and iii of Plan 2000. Two of these procedures are word-for-word what they were on November 9, 2000 when the Panel discussed them. One procedure was agreed to (subsection iii) and one was strongly disagreed to (subsection i). The third procedure, (subsection ii), had never before been seen by the PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel. PACT and PASS have no idea why 5% was used and had never seen the graphs and charts that accompanied the document. However, it was erroneously reported that there had been \"meaningful input by all concerned parties\". CONCLUSION The Knight Intervenors are deeply concerned by the PCSSD's minimal efforts to comply with Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000 and are disturbed by the PCSSD's dictatorial behavior throughout the process. Even though a Discipline Study Panel was indeed formed per Section F (Discipline), its composition changed often and it was given charge after charge. However, decisions made by the Panel were ignored and the PCS SD essentially worked in isolation of the Panel. The PCSSD continues to disregard established timelines, misinterpret key components, and misrepresent facts surrounding its efforts to comply with Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000. In Section F (Discipline) of Plan 2000, the PCSSD committed to eliminate \"racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline.\" This commitment was made twenty (20) months ago and approved by the Court sixteen (16) months ago, yet the PCSSD has still not completed or implemented provisions contained in Section F (Discipline). The very foundation of the PCSSD's compliance efforts, the collection of accurate and/or complete data, has yet to be carried out. Mathematicians would agree that solving any problem in statistics involves the following three steps: (1) definition of the problem; (2) collection of the data; and (3) analysis of the data. If the problem is misinterpreted and is not clearly defined and if the data collected is inaccurate and/or incomplete, then the analysis will most likely be flawed. Such is the case in Dr. Clowers' misinterpretation of the \"problem\" and his subsequent analysis methodology. Dr. Clowers interpreted paragraph 2, subsection i, \"teachers and other staff members who are experiencing problems\" to mean those teachers and staff members who send large numbers of students  to a building administrator for disciplinary referral. The PACT and PASS representatives on the Panel strongly disagreed with Dr. Clowers' interpretation of subsection i and just as strongly objected to his analysis methodology. The Knight Intervenors see the \"problem\" as the racial disparity that exists in the imposition of discipline, not the total nwnber of referrals written. In other words, a disparity could exist whether 2 or 200 referrals were written because the disparity is not in the number of referrals written by the teacher, the disparity exists in the nature of the discipline imposed by the administrator (suspension, Saturday school, expulsion, etc.). Dr. Clowers' statistical analysis does nothing to identify true problems. (See November 9, 2000 under \"Chronological Account of Correspondence and Events) Contrary to information contained in the May 3, 2001 and the May 7, 2001 status reports, the Discipline Study Panel was never involved in the development of, and certainly never agreed to the criteria for identifying \"teachers and other staff members who are experiencing problems\" as described in paragraph 2, subsection i of Plan 2000. How could the Panel \"develop and agree to\" criteria that was supposedly submitted to the Joshua Intervenors on August 29, 2000 when, in reality, the Panel had only met one time prior to that date (August 11, 2000) and had not addressed that topic at all? (See August 11 , 2000 and September 15, 2000 under \"Chronological Account of Correspondence and Events\") ODM, in its report dated March 18, 1998, made several recommendations to the PCSSD on ways to improve discipline procedures and reduce racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline. A few of the suggestions included: 1) offering staff development activities and training based on demonstrated need, rather than routine offerings; 2) modifying discipline plans if they are faulty, \"don't wait too long to determine why;\" 3) holding district-wide discipline summits where everyone can get the same information at the same time; 4) encouraging shared decision-making; and 5) sharing reports and other relevant discipline information with all employees. Had the PCSSD taken any or all of the suggestions made by ODM nearly three years ago, the PCSSD could have quite possibly achieved its objective of eliminating racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline. However contrary to ODM recommendations, currently teachers receive no training whatsoever from the PCSSD in the area of discipline; site-based shared decision making is discouraged; and the PC "},{"id":"bcas_p1532coll1_16682","title":"Mercer, Chris interview","collection_id":"bcas_p1532coll1","collection_title":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies Audio Collection","dcterms_contributor":["Stewart, Rhonda"],"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":["Mercer, Christopher Columbus, Jr.,"],"dc_date":["2001-10-18"],"dcterms_description":["Describes his career as a civil rights lawyer and his memories of L. C. and Daisy Bates. He worked for the Arkansas Council on Human Relations and the NAACP before moving into private practice.","Poor audio quality headphones are recommended."],"dc_format":["audio/mpeg"],"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":["Stewart-Toombs Manucript collection (BC.MSS.08.05)","Arkansas African Americans"],"dcterms_subject":["African American lawyers--Arkansas--Little Rock","Arkansas Council on Human Relations","African Americans--Civil rights--Arkansas--Little Rock","National Association for the Advancement of Colored People","Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Mercer, Chris interview"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p1532coll1/id/16682"],"dcterms_temporal":["1950/1970"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["No access limitation."],"dcterms_medium":["audiocassettes"],"dcterms_extent":["00:48:45","66.9 MB"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Bates, Daisy, 1914-1999","Bates, L. C., 1901-1980","Mercer, Christopher Columbus, Jr.,"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mwr_32","title":"Lecture series on civil rights in Alabama, 1954-1965","collection_id":null,"collection_title":null,"dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249","United States, Southern States, 33.346678, -84.119434"],"dcterms_creator":["Alabama A \u0026 M University","University of Alabama in Huntsville"],"dc_date":["2001-10-11"],"dcterms_description":["Lecture series given by Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth on the civil rights movement in Alabama."],"dc_format":["video/mp4","application/pdf"],"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":["Alabama--History","Birmingham (Ala.)","Civil rights movements--Southern States--History--20th century","Jefferson County (Ala.)"],"dcterms_title":["Lecture series on civil rights in Alabama, 1954-1965"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage","StillImage","Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of Alabama Huntsville"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://libarchstor2.uah.edu/digitalcollections/collections/show/32"],"dcterms_temporal":["2000/2009"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material may be protected under U. S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S. Code) which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. Though the University of Alabama in Huntsville Archives and Special Collections has physical ownership of the material in its collections, in some cases we may not own the copyright to the material. It is the patron's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright restrictions when publishing or otherwise distributing materials found in our collections."],"dcterms_medium":["fliers (printed matter)","lectures","transcripts","videotapes"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Shuttlesworth, Fred L., 1922-2011"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mwr_32_521","title":"Transcript of \"Trial by Fire and Water: Birmingham, 1963\" (Part I).","collection_id":"mwr_32","collection_title":"Lecture Series on Civil Rights in Alabama, 1954-1965","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249"],"dcterms_creator":["Alabama A \u0026 M University","University of Alabama in Huntsville"],"dc_date":["2001-10-11"],"dcterms_description":["Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth is the speaker in this lecture given at Alabama A\u0026M."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"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":["Lecture Series on Civil Rights in Alabama, 1954-1965","Box 1, Folder 6","University of Alabama in Huntsville Archives and Special Collections, Huntsville, Alabama"],"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Southern States--History--20th century","Birmingham (Ala.)","Jefferson County (Ala.)"],"dcterms_title":["Transcript of \"Trial by Fire and Water: Birmingham, 1963\" (Part I)."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of Alabama Huntsville"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://libarchstor2.uah.edu/digitalcollections/items/show/521"],"dcterms_temporal":["2000/2009"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material may be protected under U. S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S. Code) which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. Though the University of Alabama in Huntsville Archives and Special Collections has physical ownership of the material in its collections, in some cases we may not own the copyright to the material. It is the patron's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright restrictions when publishing or otherwise distributing materials found in our collections."],"dcterms_medium":["lectures","transcripts"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Shuttlesworth, Fred L., 1922-2011"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mwr_32_218","title":"VHS tape of \"Trial by Fire and Water: Birmingham, 1963\" (Part I).","collection_id":"mwr_32","collection_title":"Lecture Series on Civil Rights in Alabama, 1954-1965","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249"],"dcterms_creator":["Alabama A \u0026 M University","University of Alabama in Huntsville"],"dc_date":["2001-10-11"],"dcterms_description":["Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth is the speaker in this lecture given at Alabama A\u0026M."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"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":["Lecture Series on Civil Rights in Alabama, 1954-1965","Box 2, Tape 5","University of Alabama in Huntsville Archives and Special Collections, Huntsville, Alabama"],"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Southern States--History--20th century","Birmingham (Ala.)","Jefferson County (Ala.)"],"dcterms_title":["VHS tape of \"Trial by Fire and Water: Birmingham, 1963\" (Part I)."],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of Alabama Huntsville"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://libarchstor2.uah.edu/digitalcollections/items/show/218"],"dcterms_temporal":["2000/2009"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material may be protected under U. S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S. Code) which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. Though the University of Alabama in Huntsville Archives and Special Collections has physical ownership of the material in its collections, in some cases we may not own the copyright to the material. It is the patron's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright restrictions when publishing or otherwise distributing materials found in our collections."],"dcterms_medium":["videotapes","lectures"],"dcterms_extent":["2:01:04"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Shuttlesworth, Fred L., 1922-2011"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1234","title":"Oral deposition of Judy Magness","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":["Bushman Court Reporting"],"dc_date":["2001-10-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Finance","School board members","Court records","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Oral deposition of Judy Magness"],"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/1234"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDeposition taken at the Friday, Eldredge and Clark Law Firm, Little Rock, Arkansas\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n   CERTIFIED COPY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF vs No.LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS INTERVENORS DEPOSITION OF MRS JUDY MAGNESS DATE: October 5, 2001 TIME: 1:07 p.m. PLACE: The Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm 400 West Capitol, Suite #2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 APPEARANCES On Behalf of the Plaintiff: On Behalf of the Defendants: Mr. John w. Walker, Attorney John w. Walker Law Firm 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Clay Fendley, Attorney Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 ALSO PRESENT Joy Springer, The John w. Walker Law Firm Tony Rose, Sue Strickland, \u0026amp; Katherine Mitchell, Deponents Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - CERTIFIED COPY AGREEMENT OF COUNSEL ... SWEARING OF THE WITNESS .. EXAMINATION OF MRS. JUDY MAGNESS By Mr. Walker .. SIGNATURE SHEET .... ERRATA SHEET. . COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION .. * * * * * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax PAGE . . . 3 . . 3 .3-67 . .   68 .69 . 70 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 3 STIPULATIONS The deposition of Judy Magness, produced, sworn and examined at the Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm, 400 west Capitol, Suite #2200, Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 commencing at 1:07 p.m., on October 5, 2001, in the captioned cause at the instance of counsel for the Plaintiff, and said deposition being taken according to the terms and provisions of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. It is stipulated and agreed all forms and formalities in the taking, transcribing, forwarding and filing of said deposition by witness, are hereby waived by the parties, the right being expressly reserved to object to the testimony of the witness at the time of trial as to incompetency, irrelevancy and immateriality, other than those with respect to the form of questions as propounded to the witness. * * * * * P R O C E E D I N G S THEREUPON, JUDY MAGNESS having been called for examination by counsel for the plaintiff, and having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION Questions by Mr. Walker: Q. State your name Mrs. Magness. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 4 A. Judy Magness. Q. I'm smiling Mrs. Magness because I recall a conversation you and I had involving Dr. Henry Williams, do you recall that? A. We had several, which one? Q. Well, there was one when you were real hopeful that things would work with him and he would remain here--- A. Is that the telephone call I made to you? Q. Yeah. A. I'm still hopeful of that Mr. Walker. Q. Were you aware that he's back in Kansas City according to legend as principal of a charter school? A. No, but I think he'd be good at that\nhe really cares about kids. Q. Well, I just mentioned that. I thought about it when we thought about his deposition. You don't have to--- A. And I think at the time--- Q. respond to that. A. that I said to you, you know, it would be wonderful--Q. You don\"t have to put this on there. A. Why not. Q. Because it's not going to be helpful to Judge Wright. But I just--- A. That I always encouraged you to be a statesman and--Q. Oh, I'll give you an opportunity to say that--- A. Okay. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 5 Q. I mean on the record. I'll give you an opportunity to--FENDLEY: Let's just leave all of this on the record. WALKER: Well, that's fine\nwe\"ll leave it on the record. Now let me get to the questions. Q. Mrs. Magness, do you believe in racial segregation? A. Absolutely not. Q. Are you a member of any organization dedicated and devoted to eliminating racial segregation in your private activities? A. Say that one more time. Q. Are you a dues paying member of any association which has the purpose of eliminating racial discrimination? A. I don't pay many dues to organizations I'm apart of. Q. Well, I guess the answer is no. A. I'm trying to think about that. Q. We can come back to it, I'll go on to something else because I want to be, I want to be faithful to what I said about trying to get out of here brief as possible. REPORTER: Speak up Mr. Walker. Q. What is your interpretation of the term eliminate achievement disparity between the races, just those words? Eliminate achievement disparity between the races, what, how do you construe that? A. I construe that to mean that by some assessment, pick any, you know there's several so you would have to decide that any Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY 6 person taking that assessment regardless of their race would do as well as the next person. But that takes in to consideration all that has going in to the making each of those people. Q. I'm just asking now--- A. into each persons. Q. you\"re a college graduate, right? A. Yes. Q. Masters degree? A. No. Q. What\"s your degree in? A. Education. Q. I see. You were a teacher at one time? A. Years ago. Q. I see. Mrs. Magness I just asked you a question to tell me what the term meant, eliminate achievement disparity between the races. I didn't ask you how it comes about, what does that term mean, eliminate the achievement disparity between the races? A. Did you say achievement disparity the time before? Q. Yes, ma\"am. Eliminate achievement disparity between the races, what does that mean? A. That any person could achieve what another person could. Q. Does not the word eliminate mean to end? A. Yes. Q. Does not it means ah, does not it contemplate affirmative Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 1 action? A. Well--- Q. I'm going to eliminate dirt in this room, that means that I'm going to come in here and get a broom or something and eliminate dirt in this room. Eliminate means to remove doesn't it? A. One definition. Q. Can you tell me any other definition or synonym that means something other than to remove? Any other synonym that relates to eliminating? A. Well, I mean you can get several\nwhy? Q. Well, the point is I'm trying to find out here--A. If I understand English? Q. Yes, ma\"am--- A. Uh-huh. Q. that's part of it. Now achievement disparity, what does that mean to you between the races? A. That there would be a difference in the way one group ah, reflected what they were able to do as opposed to another. Q. Now Mrs. Strickland--- A. No. Q. I mean, not Mrs. Strickland but Mrs. Magness--- A. That's okay, people get us mixed up all the time. Q. No, no, no, no I don't, I don\"t\ny'all are two different people. Do you perceive that there is an achievement disparity Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY between the races or students in the Little Rock School District? A. I guess it will depend upon--Q. You can\"t answer that--- A. what measurement you\"re taking--- 8 Q. just a moment, can you answer that first of all yes or no\nis there an achievement disparity? A. Ah, I mean you're going to have to go a little more in depth there. Q. All right. I'm going to tell you, I want you to answer your questions like you are --- A. Uh-huh. Q. but it will be much more of a pleasure for me to put you on the stand and have you answer like this. I'm trying to get though some direct answers. A. Great. Q. Do you understand that there--is there, is there an achievement disparity right now between the races in the Little Rock School District that is evident? A. On some recent test scores that we received, namely ACTAP--- Q. Go ahead. A. there was a difference in the scores between all of the races that we serve in the Little Rock School District. Q. My question is there an achievement disparity between black Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box J4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 CERTlFl\"ED COPY 9 students and nonblack students\nthat's really what I'm talking about. A. The test scores reflected a difference--Q. I see. A. in those groups, yes. Q. Has there ever during your dozen years on the board--A. No. Q. Is it thirteen? A. No. Q. How many, nine? A. Seven. Q. Seven. During your seven years on the board has there ever been a time when there was not an achievement disparity between the black and the white students? A. Not as reflected on test scores that I've seen. Q. I see. Now during that time before 1998 and your tenure on the board, did the board ever by a board resolution or motion determine as its purpose to eliminate the achievement disparity between the races? 20 A. There was never a formal vote--- 21 Q. All right. 22 A. or resolution because our intent--- 23 Q. No, no, no, no, you can't keep--- 24 _ A. was always to--- 25 Q. Mrs., Mrs--- Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY 10 FENDLEY: She can answer. WALKER: She cannot--- A. our intent was always to--- WALKER: She can't state, just a moment, let me say this. She cannot state the intent of other people. She cannot talk about a collective intent. The only way that intent is manifested is by a vote\notherwise she's giving an opinion about somebody else's opinion or purpose. FENDLEY: Well, she can--- MAGNESS: When we voted to approve this--FENDLEY: she can give her opinion and you can make your objection to whether or not she's authorized to make that opinion or not. WALKER: See, I'm going to ask if there was a vote\nI didn't ask why there wasn't a vote. Q. Was there a vote? A. Restate your question. Q. Was there ever a vote of the board to eliminate the achievement disparity between black and white students before 1998? A. In other words someone would have said I move--- Q. Yes. A. that we eliminate disparity between--- Q. Yes, ma' am. A. No. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERT\\F\\ED COPY 11 Q. I see. Now do you know what was in the minds of every board member throughout this period of time, these seven years? I'm serious since you say you know what they thought. Do you know what was in--- A. I did not say I know what they thought. Q. I see. A. and no, I do not know what they thought. Q. Well, you were fixing to say the reason that they didn't do something was because of what--you can't speak for anybody but yourself can you Mrs. Magness? A. That's correct. Q. All right. Now when you came onto the board what was the standard by which student achievement was assessed? A. At that time it was one of the national test and I am thinking that it was one of the SAT\"s, it wasn\"t IX but it was one of the ones prior to that. Q. But they have different SAT'S don't they? They have SAT IV, SAT VI--- A. Yeah, they change them. Q. Yes, but it was always a SAT test wasn\"t it\nSAT test? A. As far as I recall it was. Q. That's called a Standardized Achievement Test isn\"t it? A. With the exception of, of course, students who take the AP classes have an opportunity--- Q. To take? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. to take the AP exams. Q. But let me ask you--- CERTIFIED COPY 12 A. and that would be referenced against other students across the nation that take those. Q. But my question is--what does SAT stand for, Mr--A. Standardize Achievement Test. FENDLEY: I think it's Stanford. MAGNESS: Stanford? It is Stanford, you\"re right. Stanford Achievement Test\nright, thank you. Q. Now have you all, have you all ever abandoned the Stanford Achievement Test? A. Ah, we scaled back on it. Q. When did you do so? A. About--! can't remember if it was two or three years ago because we were going to use other test that we thought would give us better information. Q. Who thought, the board, this collective board? A. Yes. Q. Did the board--- A. The board voted to do that\ncorrect. Q. They voted to do that? A. Right. Q. Did they vote the scale back on the test, the Stanford test? A. They voted to do the Stanford test in grades 4, 8, and 10 I Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 13 believe. Q. That was enlarging it wasn't it, putting it to use in more grades wasn't it? A. No. Q. How many grades had they used it in before? A. What, it started three or third or fourth grade through eleven\nwe were giving it to all of them. Q. I see. Now those test always showed that there was an achievement gap didn't they between black and white students? A. As whole groups\nyes. Q. I see. Does not, are you familiar with the court rulings in this case? A. Well, I have read most of them that I have received\nI don\"t know what are you referring to. Q. Doesn\"t the model relate to African-American students as a group rather than as individuals? A. Yes. Q. And does not the term eliminating the achievement disparity between the races apply in your opinion, to eliminating the achievement disparity between black students or AfricanAmerican students as a race in comparison to white students or nonblack students as a race or group? A. And where are you seeing that phrasing? Q. I'm just saying, we\"re talking about the class of students being African-American aren't we? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 14 A. Well, and you're stating, I mean is that wording in one of the documents? Q. No. We\"re talking, if you want to have a disparity, you can fend with me if you wish, if you want to have a disparity judgment it got to be between one group and another doesn\"t it? A. Yeah, but we serve more than two groups of students. Q. I understand. But you lump the students as either for our purposes--- A. Uh-huh. Q. as either African-American or black as one group, right? A. Uh-huh. Q. And all other students--FENDLEY: Yes. A. Yes, yes\nI\"m sorry. Q. All right. All the other students are put in that category aren't they? A. For some report\nyes. Q. All right. Now do you believe that you all have committed to eliminate the achievement disparity between the races to any one at any time? A. You want to--- Q. Have you ever as a board made the commitment to eliminate achievement disparity between the races? A. In what ways are you wanting to know? Q. I'm just saying has there ever been that board commitment Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 15 in a document? A. Yeah. Q. I see. Now isn\"t it true also that you committee to in taking the state\"s money, twenty million dollars, that you eliminate, that you agreed to bring the, to narrow the gap to a point where black students and white students were within ten points of each other? A. That was the old agreement. Q. Well, has the agreement with the state ever changed? Well, if you call the old agreement, has that agreement with the state ever changed? I mean I would like to see it if it has changed. Where is the state agreement. A. Well, quite frankly I don't remember the ah--do you have that, the last--- Q. The old agreement--- A. it was worked out with the state? FENDLEY: Not with me, no. MAGNESS: Okay, because I would need to be refreshed on that before I could answer anything on it. FENDLEY: I mean, you just tell him you don\"t know. MAGNESS: Okay. WALKER: That\"s fine. Q. You say the old agreement some how or another has changed and you\"re no longer committed. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box J4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED copy 16 A. Now, I didn\"t say it has changed, I said the old agreement said that. Q. Well, what about are you familiar with the--is the old agreement still in effect? A. Which old, which one? Q. The one that you talked about, that old agreement that you said that was under the old agreement\nis it still--- A. I don't know, I don't know. Q. Well, tell me then what's the basis of your statement that that was under the old agreement\nso what\"s if it's under the old agreement? Has that agreement been modified in your opinion? A. I do not know. Well, let me put it this way, I don't remember. I know we have been in discussions with the state and worked something out but particulars I do not know. Q. Do you know if the Joshua Intervenors were parties to that agreement? A. I don't know. Q. Do you agree or have your lawyers informed you that they represented to the court that the revised plan on January 16, 1998 incorporated the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals seven elements which it considered to be crucial and with respect to which no retreat would be approved? A. Yes. Q. And one of them was the effort to eliminate achievement Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box i4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax - - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 disparity between the races? A. Yes. CERTIFIED COPY 17 Q. Now do you agree that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improving African-American achievement? A. I don't think that's the only one. Q. Have you represented to the court that that was the only legitimate one? FENDLEY: You personally? WALKER: I mean the board. A. Not me personally. Q. I mean the board. Has not the board, you were president of the board in 1998 weren't you? A. Right. Q. You read this memorandum to the district court didn't you? A. That's correct. Q. And that\"s what it says here\nisn't that your commitment? A. That's right. Q. Now are you backing away from that commitment now? A. Absolutely not. Q. I see. Now are you saying that this is not the only one? Why would you tell the court that this is only legitimate means if it's not the only one? 24 . A. No, let\"s back up. 25 Q. Just a minute. Cobb Court Reporting p, o. Box f4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 18 A. Your question was--- Q. Just a minute, let me go back. I said do you agree that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improving African-American achievement. I asked you that question and you said no, not the only one. A. It, it's not the only legitimate way. As Mr. Berkley stated--- Q. Well, why would you say that--- A. it's the only acceptable way because the other way could be that we would try to drag down other kids scores and that, and you could narrow it. Q. You don't have to drag down anybody's, you don't have to drag down any--- A. I hope not because we\"re not going to do that. Q. Just a moment, just a moment. You don't have to drag down anybody's scores if you focus on improving African-American achievement do you? A. That's correct. Q. So as you teach these white kids and you focus--A. As we teach all kids. Q. no, as you teach these white kids who are already up, you can focus on the deficiencies of the black kids can you not? A. Yes. Q. Specifically, that doesn't bring the white kids down does it Mrs. Magness? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 19 A. No. You asked me if that was the only legitimate what to do it and my answer was no, that's not the only legitimate way but that\"s the only acceptable way to do it. Q. Well, we're not talking about in this lawsuit bringing anybody\"s achievement down are we? A. I hope not Mr. Walker. Q. Well now .if you say that it's the only legitimate way if by improving African-American achievement, that means then you have to focus on African-American achievement doesn\"t it? A. Yes. Q. Which means that you, by focusing upon African-American achievement, means that you have to focus away from all students to African-American students doesn't it? A. No. Q. Doesn't it mean that if you have a disparity you have been focusing upon all children? A. Not necessarily. Q. All right. Why is the disparity there you're going to say, tell me you\"re going to say it's because of socioeconomics? A. I'm going to say there are lot of reasons for disparity. Q. What are they, what are they in your professional opinion? A. From everything I've read and heard there are several reasons we have disparity. One could be that the test are bias. Another is socioeconomic. Another is parent involvement. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 20 Q. What else? A. Well, of course, the experiences that the child has and the readiness to learn when they get to school. Q. Well, you knew all of these things when you all entered into the settlement agreement in '89--- A. That's right--well, I don't know about that. Q. and you knew of all of those things when you entered into it in 1998. A. That's correct. FENDLAND: You, she knew? WALKER: Meaning the board. Q. You knew those things. A. Uh-huh, yes. Q. What you're saying now is that's not something you just learned last week? A. No. Q. All right. So if you knew those things and you still make the commitment to eliminate the achievement disparity it is based isn't it that there is no inherent racial inferiority of black people? FENDLEY: Let me object to the question and you say committed to eliminate the achievement disparity. WALKER: You may. Q. First of all you do accept the notion that there is no such thing as white superiority and black inferiority, isn't that Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 21 correct? A. That is correct. Q. All right. So once you accept the premise that all people are equal then you have to accept the premise that all students can learn don\"t you? A. Absolutely. Q. All right. And then that means that you make them, I mean you put them in that best posture so they can learn equally well don't you? A. Yes. Q. That's why you adopted English as a second language, for instance, for the Hispanic children? A. Right. Q. And that's recognition of the fact that they had a deficiency with respect to being able to understand English--A. Uh-huh. Q. to the same extent. So that means if you focus on the Hispanics you can focus upon black people doesn't it? A. Right. Q. Now where are the focus programs that have been developed in accordance with 2.7--- A. Okay. Q. what are the focus programs? A. Some of them would include the pre-K III initiatives in the elementary schools--- cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box f4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. Right. A. and the fact that we have increased our four-year-old programs and those have always been there for students whose background need enrichment. Q. Pre-K is one, what are the other programs? A. Okay, the--- FENDLAND: Pre-Kand Early, the Early one--WALKER: Early Childhood, what else. A. Ear--yeah, Early Childhood. Okay, the fourth--- 22 Q. Let me, let me, let me offer you a little bit better help. I'll let Mr. Fendley answer this question for you for the record and I'll adopt, let you adopt his answer since he\"s been on the Compliance Committee. If you want to answer for her Mr- FENDLEY: I'm not, you\"re not taking my deposition. WALKER: But I don\"t want you but I mean since you want to suggest some answers t o her. FENDLEY: I, you, she had already sai d the fouryear- old program and you--- MAGNESS: She was just, he was just repeating it. WALKER: He didn't say, she didn\"t say Early Childhood. Q. But I'm saying that's fine, if he wants to state them Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 23 whatever it is I'm going to tell you they don't exist. Pre-K, that one what else? A. Early Childhood. Q. Early Childhood, thank you. A. ELLA. Q. ELLA. A. Smart Step, Smart Start. In some of our schools we\"re using Success for All which is a proven model to particularly help those students who have not come in with the skills that they need. Q. What else? A. Ah, at Washington we have ah, what is that reading programs, it's been proven very effective in one of the ah, schools in the ah, delta down in southeast. Oh, it's a reading program, Direct Instruction and it has also met with a lot of national recognition. Q. What else? A. We have changed our math and science curriculums because we could tell from the scores that we were receiving that our students were not improving--- Q. What else? A. and ah, all the programs that we have put in have been ah, nationally recognized. Q. Well, name them\nI'm not asking you to explain them. A. Okay. Reading, writing workshop in our middle schools ah, Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164- 0004 Phone: (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY accelerated learning center for high school kids that needed more one-on-one and ah, another alternative--- Q. Well, just tell me the programs without explaining them. A. I might like to explain them. Q. I don't want you--- A. You may not know about them. Q. but I don't want you to explain them now but, you know, just tell me what they are. 24 A. Okay, let me see. Ah, increased use of computers which ah, can offer if used properly enhance instruction and achievement. Q. All right. A. We are improving our fine arts program with a new fine arts director--- Q. All right. A. based on research recently. And we went to the middle school concept, that's not exactly a program, that's more of a framework in which to put the programs. Q. All right, what else? A. But the framework also--Q. I'm not asking--- A. made it easier--- Q. I'm not asking for you to explain them--A. I am to explain to you that--- Q. No, no, I want you to answer my question. FENDLEY: But she\"s--Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY WALKER: No, no, no, no, she can't explain. FENDLEY: she's not wasting time. WALKER: No, no, no, no, no. I'm not, only asking her to identify the programs, I'm not asking her to explain them. 25 FENDLEY: Well, she\"s identifying some of them in my interpretation by explaining what they are as opposed to giving a name. WALKER: All right. If you don\"t mind her staying that's fine. MAGNESS: I have all afternoon. WALKER: Well good, thank you. Thank you, you know I can stay all night. A. Ah, the middle school structure does help our kids because a group of kids are taught by a group of teachers which hopefully then allows teachers to really be on top of the achievement of the students and give them any extra help they need, be sure they don't fall through the cracks, et cetera. I'll stop there. Q. No, I want the other programs, I want you to tell me all of the programs that you all have adopted. A. Those are the ones that I can think of off the top of my head. Well, we do have some other good ones of course like East Labs, Cisco, university School--- Q. Cisco, okay go ahead\nUniversity School, what else? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. E-Slabs. Q. Okay. CERTIFIED COPY 26 A. And then we have our good program an McClellan the business education program that is, has been recognized and won lots of awards. Q. Has it won awards in Little Rock or won--A. Yes, yes. Q. Okay, when was that? A. Ah, either last year or the year before and then two years before that. Q. All right. All right, keep going. A. Well, let me see. At Central we have International Studies, Magnet. Q. All right, what else? A. umm, that's enough. Q. That\"s enough I'll as--- A. That\"s just ah, that\"s just a cross section. Q. Well, that's fine. I have listened and you more so than any of the other board members have identified these programs. But 2.71 talks about program evaluation. A. That's correct. Q. Have these programs been evaluated that you have just mentioned? A. Ah, some of them have--- Q. Well, the ones that are listed on here, I don\"t see a Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY single one that you listed on there, on here being listed on page 148 as having been evaluated. A. Okay. Q. Look, look, now make sure, look at--- A. 2.7. whatever does not say that it has to be a yearly written, formal, evaluation does it? 27 Q. Well now I don't know how you interpret this but I'm saying at least none of the programs that you have mentioned appear to have been listed under what you all reported to the court had been done as of March 15. Now I stand to be corrected, you say here program evaluation and you understand you all were committed to make program evaluation? A. Right, uh-huh. Q. All right. And then you say that in addition to--A. Well, your middle school was evaluated--- Q. Well, just a moment. A. and science was evaluated, science and math was evaluated. Q. Well now look, look. A. Uh-huh. Q. Math--show me if you can see middle school on there as something you reported to the court as having been evaluated? A. Ah, yes, it's up in one of the top paragraphs on here I think. Q. What does it say? A. Ah, let me let your read it. It's right in here. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 28 FENDLEY: Just for the record she's referring to the paragraphs under the heading Program Evaluation which discusses the board research agenda. Q. It says, P-R-E, is this what you\"re referring to? P-R-E prepared the initial components of the evaluations for pre-K III literacy, the National Science Foundation Project components, and the implementation of middle schools in August of 2000, that's the initial components. Now are you saying that you all have seen those final evaluations? A. We saw a draft--- Q. That's yes or no. Have you seen a final evaluation--A. Not the final. FENDLEY: She can answer any way she wants to. WALKER: My question is my question. FENDLEY: She doesn't have to answer yes or no. Q. Have you seen a final evaluation? I don't mean to fend with you, have you seen a final evaluation? A. No. Q. All right. And isn't it true that the board did not accept the evaluations that were presented? A. We saw the draft evaluations that were presented and we did not think that they were thorough enough--- Q. Mrs. Magness--- A. and we had questions about them so rather than accept flawed what we considered to be not as good as we would like Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box J4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY 29 evaluations, no we did not formally accept those. Q. All right now, I want you to have an understanding. If I want you opinion about how other people thought, I'll ask it. If I want an opinion about what the board did, I'll ask that. I object to anything where you speculate about the motivation of other people. Now this situation--- A. Well, obviously if we didn't formally accept them, we did not think they were what we wanted. Q. That's right. Now have you ever received what you wanted with respect to the evaluations that were presented? A. Which evaluations? Q. The ones that you referred to that you did not accept? A. We have not accepted a final evaluation of those programs. Q. I see. But yet you told the court that you had finally evaluated those programs didn't you? FENDLEY: Object as to form, that's not what we told the court. Q. Didn't you tell us that the evaluations had been completed? A. I don't know. Q. That's fine. Now I notice here you have Success For All as a program with some great review, is that right? A. It supposedly is and yes, it is working in some of our schools. Q. Okay. Were you aware that Dr. Lesley had eliminated Success For All in a number of schools? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY FENDLEY: Object as to form--Q. Were you aware of that? FENDLEY: it assumes facts not in evidence. WALKER: Well, it may not be in evidence but we're not in court. Q. Were you aware that she has eliminated Success For All? A. I was aware--- FENDLEY: Object as to the form of the questions. Q. Well, do you know whether she has, I'll put it that way. Do you know whether she's eliminated Success For All because 30 her notion was--first of all do you know if she's eliminated it before this year? A. Ah, I know that Success For All--- Q. Do you know is my question, do you know if she had eliminated the Success For All programs in a number of schools? FENDLEY: Let the witness answer. WALKER: That's what I'm asking, do you know if she did that? A. I know that Success For All was taken out of some schools because it was not effective. Q. All right. Now have you seen any written evaluation from anybody including Dr. Lesley to the effect that Success For All was not effective in a particular school, a written eval--- A. Yes. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box f4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. Where are those evaluations now and when--A. Well, it's not--- Q. when can I see them? 31 A. it is the result of tests that were given the students and their academic achievement. Q. Let me ask you my question. You understand Mrs. Magness, you told me you were a college graduate too, so nobody here can say that they don\"t understand questions. A written evaluation is an evaluation that I can put finger on and see. Is there a written evaluation which determined from the PRE Department that determine that Success For All was not a working program? A. Well, I don\"t know what you're looking for in a written evaluation Mr. Walker what, what components do you want to be there? What do you want it to look like? Q. Mrs. Magness, first of all have you seem such a written evaluation, that's all\ni f so I'd like to see it. But have you seen such an evaluation? A. I told you that I have seen the test results--- Q. I'm not asking about the test results, I'm talking wri--A. That's all I've seen on them. Q. Now you understand an evaluation is more than test results don't you? A. So eliminating--Q. No, no, no--- A. the disparity gap--- cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 32 Q. no, no, no, now lis--- A. would be more than just test scores? Q. listen. Do you understand that you as a board set up and approved an evaluation model and format? A. umm, yes. Q. I see. Do you expect evaluations to be made pursuant to that model and format? A. Yes. Q. Have you ever seen an evaluation of Success For All pursuant to that format? A. No. Q. I see. A. But that has never been one of the ones on our agenda specifically. Q. Well, you listed--- A. Now the evaluation will be of like what was the achievement of students in reading K-3. Q. Well, what were--- A. that program will be involved in trying to raise those achievement levels. Q. Well can you tell me what is on the agenda for complying with 2.71 by board motion, by board motion--- A. Uh-huh. Q. can you tell me which programs are there? A. The ones that were evaluated last year--cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 , 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. National Science, Early Literacy, and Middle School? A. And English as a second language and quite frankly I've forgotten what we put down for this year. Q. Well, I don\"t see National Science being evaluated here. FENDLEY: You're not looking. 33 WALKER: I see that you said--you indicated that it was evaluated sufficiently to make a judgment so I determined that wasn\"t an evaluation\nso am I wrong about that? A. It was an evaluation. Q. All right, that's fine. A. It was that we had other questions and it was to be ah, looked at again, our questions answered and brought back. Q. So that the evaluation was incomplete? A. Right. Q. So you\"re saying that you're going to rest on an incomplete evaluation as an evaluation in compliance with 2.71? A. I'm going to say that for me I will accept that for this last year but because it is not what I think it should be, I will not accept it further. Q. Now show me anywhere on here where you have applied, where you have evaluated the Early Literacy program? A. Ah, right here. Q. You prepared the initial components of evaluation for pre-k through literacy. That means that you set an agenda doesn\"t it? It doesn\"t mean that you have made an evaluation does it Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164- 0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY Mrs. ah--- A. I have seen an evaluation of that. Q. Well, what is it called and who has it? FENDLAND: You've got it. SPRINGER: No we don't. 34 WALKER: Well, that's fine. Is that what you've referred to as the draft Mrs. Magness? A. Ah, the one I saw was a draft, yes. SPRINGER: Thank you. Q. I see. Well, you don\"t call a draft an evaluation do you? A. I call it a draft evaluation Mr. Walker, what would you want me to call it\na draft funny word sheet? Q. Well, have you seen any final evaluation of any of the programs contemplated under 2.7 or 71, a final evaluation of any--- A. Not, not a final evaluation of specific programs. Have I seen the result of the achievement increased and achievement results of those\nyes. Q. Have you been informed by Dr. Lesley that the evaluation by Dr. Nunnery that is referred to here on page 148 was an incompetent evaluation? A. Nope. Q. Did you consider his evaluation to be competent? A. I haven't seen it. Q. Have you any--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. Unless his, unless he, I mean, he was, I think he was involved in the draft versions that we saw. Q. I see. Are you a friend of Dr. Lesley's? A. Yes. Q. I see. Do you spend a lot of time with her? A. No. Q. Do you spend a lot of time in receiving her e-mails? A. No. Q. Do you receive any e-mails from her? A. I\"ve received one or two. Q. Do you send her e-mails? A. I've responded to one. Q. I see. WALKER: Mr. Fendley can we have those? MAGNESS: You should have it. WALKER: Not from Mrs. Magness. 35 FENDLEY: If they\"re still available\nwe'll see. MAGNESS: I doubt if they are, I delete mine regularly. WALKER: Well, we know there is a deletion program, are you familiar with the administrative regulation on deletion of e-mails? A. Huh-uh. FENDLEY: No. Q. Did you know that one had been promulgated by the Cobb Court Reporting P, 0, Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 36 superintendent saying that to keep these jokers for two weeks and then they're to be eliminated? FENDLEY: That's a paraphrase. WALKER: Fifteen days and they\"re supposed to be moved off. A. I think that's a good practice. Isn't that what they do in business? Q. No, ma'am. Are you familiar with the fact that the court has said that when you eliminate these--are you familiar with the court saying that if you have eliminated them after the request has been made--- A. Uh-huh. Q. She will construe ah, she will, she will determine an adverse inference upon that fact? Now do you know what an adverse inference is? A. No. Q. An adverse inference I would take would be--the inference is that the information deleted would be helpful to the person seeking it. A. Uh. Oh, if I've got them I mean I, you know--Q. You've got them, that's fine. A. No, I said if I have them you're more than welcome to'em. Q. All right. Now I understand that you and Mr. ah, Dr. Darty have a material disagreement over the accomplishments of the school district with respect to remediation, is that fair to Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 37 say? A. I don\"t know. Q. Did you not take issue with his statement at the school board meeting last week or week before last? A. Urnrn, I took--not, no. Q. You did not, that's fine. A. No. Q. Do you believe that the achievement gap that exist in the Little Rock School District between black and white students can be eliminated? A. I believe that--- Q. That's a yes or no\nI don't want an explanation now. FENDLEY: Let me, I'll object then because you didn\"t put any sort of time frame on there. Q. I just asked you if you believe that it can be eliminated\nthat's yes or no. FENDLEY: Ever? WALKER: Mr., please don\"t try to influence my answer. Q. Do you believe it can be eliminated? A. Well, I'll ask, in what time frame? Q. See you suggested--- A. So a little more. Q. No, no. Do you believe that the achievement gap can be eliminated by the Little Rock School District? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 38 A. Yes. Q. I see. Now I'll ask you the question, over what time frame will it take at the minimum? A. I don\"t know. Q. Will it take 12 years? A. I\"m not going to put a time on it. Q. I see. But you do acknowledge that there has to be if that as a goal before you can begin to address the subject, elimination? A. I am not as concerned about looking at that--Q. Mrs. Magness listen to the question--- A. if I am seeing that--- Q. I\"m not asking about your concerns--A. every--- Q. I'm only concerned about you--A. student does--- FENDLEY: Let her--WALKER: No--- A. to the best--- FENDLEY: finish her answer. WALKER: I'm only concerned that you answer my question. A. that that student can do. WALKER: I'm only--- REPORTER: One at a time, please. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 39 Q. I'm only concerned about your answer to my question. This is not a lawsuit about getting every student to do what, the best he can\nyou understand that don't you? A. No. Q. Is it your understanding that this lawsuit is about getting every student to be able to do the best he can\nis that your understanding? A. That the lawsuit is about every student achieving high academic--- Q. So that's your belief? You understand in the world Mrs. Magness that not every student can be a high achiever academically\nyou understand that don't you? White and black students and not everyone can be a high achiever? A. No, but they can do--I want them to be able to--Q. Mrs., Mrs--- A. achieve the most they can. Q. But there is not way for determining what a person's limits are is there? There\"s no way for you to determine that. A. No. Q. So the point here is and you understand that the law requires that students who have been the victim of discrimination be the ones who are the target of remediation. They're the ones who are owed the remedy\nyou know that don't you? A. Say that again. Cobb Court Reporting P, o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. Upon the finding of discrimination---A. Uh-huh. 40 Q. and there is a class defined, you then have what's called victims of discrimination. And the remedy has to apply to the victims, you understand that do you not? A. Yes. Q. I see. Now the remedy has to be specifically applied to the interest of black children here, do you understand that? A. Uh-huh. Q. And not white children. FENDLEY: You need to say yes or no. MAGNESS: Right, okay. FENDLEY: I mean that\"s for the record, she can\"t get uh-huh or huh-uh. MAGNESS: Wait, I\"m sorry. A. Say that last one again. Q. The remedy goes to black children not to white children. A. Right. Q. All right. Now are there any programs that you know of including middle school, early literacy and National Science that goes specifically to remediating the academic achievement disparities that black students suffer? A. Yes, all those. Q. What is the intended incremental remediation of black student deficiency on an annual basis expected by this school Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 . 25 CERTIFIED COPY 41 district? A. Explain that a little more. FENDLEY: Do you need to turn your tape over. Q. we understand that students, Mrs. Magness we understand if you have students in 30 percentile and white in the 60 that the goal is not to move the whites up but it's to move the blacks up\ndo you accept that premise? REPORTER: One moment. You may continue. Do you accept that premise, that was his last words. A. Ah, say it again one more time. Q. Do you accept that where the white students are already beyond the national norm, the 60 percentile or above in general and the blacks are way below say in the 30 percent, that the goal is to move the blacks, the black students, the AfricanAmerican students closer to the white students? A. I accept that as a goal. Q. Fine. And isn't it true that your plans and programs have to be focus upon doing that? A. Yes. Q. All right. And it's not to be trying to get these white students as far as they can go? A. I think we can do both. Q. Now the focus of the law, the requirement of the lawsuit is to remediate the underachievement of blacks students isn't it? A. It is to increase--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 42 Q. Can you say yes or no to that? A. No. Q. You can't, that's fine. I want you to say no because you don't believe it\nI understand where you're--- FENDLEY: Well, she didn't say she didn't believe that. WALKER: Well, your belief is--A. I did not say I didn't believe that. Q. Your belief has been stated many times Mrs. Magness is we're here committed to teach all children and get them as far as they can go\nthat's your position. A. That's right. Q. All right. And that means doesn't it Mrs. Magness that it's not upon dealing with the lowest achievement group? A. Yes, it is dealing with the lowest achievement group. Q. All right. You saw your report which said what has happened in the district is this: There are some modest black gains and there are some gains for whites but nonetheless the gap is not changing yet. But what is happening is that the poorest white students are suffering while black students are gaining\nyou did not see that report? A. No. Q. All right. The gains have come, for white kids have at the expense of poor white kids, have you seen that? A. No. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. You understand that when black students don\"t learn poor white kids don\"t learn either? 43 A. When any student does not learn any group of students in a classroom do not learn then I would say most of them are not in that classroom. Q. The evidence is that white students continue to learn and improve, your own record shows--- A. So are you saying that our black kids are not smart enough to do that? Q. The record shows here that your focus is upon improving the education of all students, so your teachers work with those students they're most comfortable with. A. I disagree. FENDLEY: Object as to form. Q. All right, you may disagree. All right, well then how can you--when you say Mrs. Magness that it\"s easier to get a group of students in a lower percentile, say 20 to 30 percentile up 15 or 20 points then it would be to get a student in the 60th or 70th percentile up 10 or 15 points? A. I would say it would depend on the age of the student and the grade level. Q. Mrs. Magness just it's a matter of reasoning the person--A. Uh-huh. Q. whose got the furthest to go has the possibility of making the greatest gain\nisn't that correct? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box H sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 44 A. Has the possibility, yes. Q. I see. But in this district over the years the only gains on the SAT anyway are reflected for white students. A. I disagree. Q. Can you tell me any time in the last four years when that was not reflected? A. No, I cannot. Q. So in the last four years you acknowledge that those--- A. No, I don't know. Q. Have you looked at the SAT results? A. Yes, but I have not--I don't remember comparing them. Q. Have you heard Dr. Lesley say that the achievement disparity in lower grades, I think second or third grade pre-k through 3 has been eliminated? A. No, not eliminated. Q. Have you heard her say that it's to the point where it statistically inconsequential? A. No--- Q. I see. A. I don't remember her saying that. Q. I see. A. I know that we, that our programs that we have put in there have improved the achievement level of all the students. Q. Mrs. Magness can you explain why the predominantly black schools do not have lower class sizes then the mixed schools? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. I don't know whether they do or not. Q. You haven't seen your own report? A. I hav--I don't remember reading the report that said the size of the classrooms. Q. Do you recall previously testifying that it was contemplated that there would be smaller classes for those children who were in the most disadvantaged circumstances? A. I\"ve never testified before. Q. You've never given a deposition before? A. No. FENDLEY: In this case? MAGNESS: Not in this case. Q. Well, maybe it's at the school board meeting. Have you ever taken that position publicly? A. Okay, say it again. 45 Q. That the children in the most disadvantaged circumstances needed to have the lower pupil/teacher ratios? A. I don\"t remember saying that. Q. Do you believe that? A. I believe--well, if I had all the money in the world and could design the school, I would make all pre-K through second at least 1 to 15. Q. Mrs. Magness if you have a group of--you understand when children come to school they come there as a reflection of their environment? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. [Witness nodding head up and down.] Q. Is that right? REPORTER: Answer verbally. A. Oh--- Q. You said oh, and she was nodding yes. A. Yes, yes\nI was thinking on that. 46 Q. Now you understand that the children from Mr. Rose\"s and Mrs. Strickland's area who come to school score lower, white children from their area score lower than the children who come from your area? A. I wouldn\"t agree to that. Q. Would you not agree that the children whom they represent who are white are generally as a group of lower socioeconomic status compared to your children, the kids in yours? A. No. Q. Are you familiar with the census tracks which show the relative socioeconomic status of students? A. No, I have not\nI don't remember seeing that. Q. Do you believe that the children in southwest Little Rock, the white students in southwest Little Rock have the same socioeconomic status as the ones in your census track? A. Some of them. Q. Well now we know that there are some blacks who do and there are some whites--- A. Uh-huh. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 47 Q. but we\"re talking about groupings. would you think--- A. So now you\"re talking about all of southwest Little Rock? Q. No, no, I\"m just saying the census tracks there. Would you not agree Mrs. Magness that if you were dealing with only white students and you didn't have a black student around and you had poor kids who happened to be white irrespective of where they lived but they lived in groups and you had schools for them and you had middle class to rich kids and you had schools for them, wouldn\"t you feel that those students from the lower group would have lower test scores on standardize test when they entered school than the ones in the well-to-do group? A. When they entered school? Q. Yes, ma' am. A. Yes. Q. And would not those test score disparities remain throughout absent int ervention by the school district? A. I don\"t know that. Q. All right. But at least if you recognize it the goal is to get these students up to the same level as it is the other students isn\"t it? A. Uh-huh. Q. All right. Which means then the teachers over here with these students have more work to do in order to move them ahead at a comparable, so they can be at a comparable level than the students over here? Cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box i4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. I don't know that. Q. Is not that reasonable Mrs. Magness? A. I don't know. Q. So then why do we talk about socioeconomic status if socioeconomic status doesn't mean anything? One of your arguments to me have been this is all attributed to socioeconomic standards. A. No, I did not say that. Q. Did you not indicate at the board meeting that the differences in achievement were due to socioeconomic status? A. No. Q. Did you hear Dr. Lesley say that? A. No. Q. Did she not say anything even comparable to that? A. Socioeconomic status was discussed. 48 Q. All right, that's fine. Doesn't it stand to reason if you got a group of kids over here who can't really read and don't have worldly experiences and don't have two-parent families and support systems that the teachers are going to have to work more with them than a group of differently situated students over here? A. I don't know. Q. Can you honestly say you don't know Mrs. Magness? A. I can honestly say that. Q. I see. Did you agree years ago to double funding? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY A. No, I was not in on that decision. Q. Do you support double funding now? A. Umm, I'm supporting it because I have agreed to it with this plan. Q. But do you support it conceptually? 49 A. Conceptually I support putting the money and the resources where they're needed the most. Q. Well, go back to my hypothetical. A. Okay. Q. The students over here start out lower and they're all white [indicating with right hand]. A. Okay. If, well, it doesn't matter to me--- Q. The students over here [indicating with left hand]--A. what color these kids are--- Q. so my point is--- A. or what their background is--Q. but I'm saying--- A. what I want Mr. Walker--- Q. just a moment, listen to my question\nlet me finish. My question is a nonracial hypothetical\nso race isn't an issue now. You got poor kids over here [indicating with right hand] who are white and you\"ve got rich kids over here [indicating with left hand] and the white kids are behind over here [motioning with right hand] and these are at National norms or about [indicating with left hand]. Where did put in my Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 50 hypothetical--- FENDLAND: Just for the record Mr. Walker, you\"re not going to be able to see which hand you're point to. WALKER: Well now, one hand, other hand. Q. Now do you devote more resources to the underachievers or to the high achievers? A. You devote the resources wherever they're needed. If the underachievers need the resources because the way that their school is structured and the way their teachers are teaching, need more resources then yes, that's where they go. Q. Listen to my question. A. You also have to be sure that you have the necessary resources that will meet the needs of these kids. Q. But now in the hypothetical you would acknowledge that the need is greatest to bring these kids up over there [indicating with right hand]? A. The need is the greatest there. Q. So that means you should put more resources--- FENDLEY: For the poor kids is what you\"re--A. For the poor kids. Q. Yes. So you should put more resources in the area where the poor children are, isn't that correct? A. Again Mr. Walker it depends--- Q. Under your hypothetical. A. it depends on how those, how that is going to be addressed, Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 51 what is going to be done to bring those kids up, to raise their achievement levels. Q. Well, the need--- A. And if it requires more money and more resources, yes. Q. Well, do you not feel that it's going to necessarily require more resources when the children are poorer? A. It may. Q. All right. Now let's just talk about reality for a moment. Now I\"ve spoken to Mrs. Strickland about this and I don't know whether she's backing away from it but you look at McClellan and, McClellan especially and Mabelvale and Cloverdale and you compare those facilities with Central or Parkview, you acknowledge that McClellan is not the equal physically don't you of Parkview and Central? A. In what way? Q. The physical facilities. Even the appearance of the thing, the interior of the building, I mean you acknowledge that don't you? A. Well no. Q. That's fine. A. I would say McClellan and, you know, probably doesn't look any worse than Central. Now Parkview is newer so, you know, it looks better. Q. I see. Now would you not acknowledge that in general the schools of the southwest are not equal to the schools in the Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 52 west? A. No. Q. I see. would you not acknowledge that the teacher turnover in the schools in the southwest is greater than it is in the schools in the west? A. I don\"t know that. Q. Do you not acknowledge that the educational need for educational achievement is different in the southwest than it is in the west? A. In what ways? Q. Well, they, you have more underachieving students as determined by standardize test in the southwest than you do in the west. A. Now when you\"re saying west what, what are you--- Q. I'm saying Pulaski Heights, that northwest, Pulaski Heights, Forest Heights, Parkview, those schools as over against Coverdale and Mabelvale. A. And the question was? Q. You know, just the achievement level of students? A. I'm trying to remember. Now Parkview I think we should take out since it is a magnets but--- Q. Let\"s, just assume, just assume for my instance, you can deal with assumption\nlet's assume that that's for real. If you're trying to get all students to more or less the same achievement level, you put the resources in the area do you not Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY where the deficiencies are evident don't you? A. I would think so\nyes. 53 Q. That means then that you should have instead of equal resources in all schools, you should have greater resources in some schools than others doesn't it? A. And as I recall--- Q. Doesn't that mean that, yes or no? A. this says equitable. Q. Well, we're talking about resources here. Now if we know the schools in the southwest are deficient in terms of what they can do, in terms of money, you don't try to have an equal thing across the board do you? A. I don't know that I would agree with the deficient. Q. I see, I see. I don't need to have any further--I think that ah, I just have one or two more questions\njust a moment. [A recess was taken at 2:08 p.m., proceedings resumed at 2:09 p.m., to-wit:] REPORTER: We are on the record, sir and you may continue. DIRECT EXAMINATION CON'T Questions by Mr. Walker Con't: Q. Did the board ever publicly discuss the issue before Dr. Carnine began approaching the State Department of Education about loan forgiveness or the subject of loan forgiveness? A. Okay, say the first of that again. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 54 Q. Did the board--let me change that question. Did the board ever authorize Dr. Corinine to approach the State Department of Education about loan forgiveness of the 20 million dollar loan\ndid they do that by a motion? A. I don't remember. Q. Did you, did the board ever make an evaluation of whether it had remediated any portion of the achievement disparity that it committed to the State of Arkansas that it would eliminate? A. You\"re going to have to go further on that. FENDLEY: Object to the form of the question. Q. Was any elimination in the disparity gap known to the board as of January 2001 as evidence by a writing the board had before it? A. Umm, as in a formal document? Q. Yes, ma'am. A. No. Q. All right. Did Dr. Corinine in a public meeting ever inform you that he was meeting with me with respect to loan forgiveness during the meetings that he was having with the State Department of Education on that subject? A. Not that I remember. Q. Did you feel that you all were committed to the agreement with the state to remediate achievement disparities between black and white students to the extent of 10 percent? A. Say that again? Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box t4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 55 Q. Did you feel that the board was committed to fulfill its agreement with the state to remediate achievement disparities as provided--- A. So now I can tell you if I feel the board was and read their minds? Q. No, I\"m asking did the board ever have, let's read the, I'm not asking you--what's the question? FENDLEY: It's exactly--- WALKER: Let's take the question. Q. Did the board ever commit to the state that it would remediate achievement disparity, I'm going to do it in three steps, did it ever do that? A. Ah, that was part of the agreement--Q. That's right. A. in '89. Q. All right now what steps did the board take to comply with that\nto do that what steps did it take to comply with that? FENDLEY: Wel l, let me just object as to form because that assumes--- MAGNESS: Right. FENDLEY: ah, since a standard was never decided under that test, we could have met that standard in 1989. Q. My question now--- FENDLEY: So there wouldn\"t be any ah, issue of remedying anything. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box i4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (50 1 ) 490 - 0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 - 25 CERTIFIED COPY 56 WALKER: Well, that's an argument for me counsel that he has not been successful on and the judge told him that the other day when you weren\"t in court. FENDLEY: Well, I'll object to that, that's not true. WALKER: She told you, he told him in no uncertain terms when you weren't in court that she wasn\"t buying that you all did not have a duty to eliminate or remediate achievement disparities and he can get the transcript and see it. Q. You haven't been told that have you? A. John, we're all trying to eliminate and remediate the disparity score, we're all trying. Q. I haven't heard you, I haven\"t heard you say one thing that leads me to believe that you are. Your notion is that you education the children and they learn if they want to and you're teaching all children. FENDLEY: Object, that's argue--Q. That's what I've heard. FENDLEY: you're just arguing with the witness. Q. Now I'm asking you did you have a commitment to the board to do that, to the State Board of Education to eliminate disparity? A. The board in '89 made that commitment. Q. All right. Did the board, any subsequent board which you Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 were on--- A. We did not, we--- Q. back away, back away--A. no. CERTIFIED COPY Q. All right. Is that still the commitment? 57 A. It is still, as far as I know, nothing has changed\nit is still the board's commitment to eliminate the disparity between the races. Q. In achievement? A. Yes. Q. I see. What is the timetable that the board has for eliminating--- A. We do not have--Q. the disparity? A. a timetable. Q. So it could take a thousand years? A. It could. Q. That's good. Did Dr. Corinine ever tell you that it was contemplated that the Joshua Intervenors would have a role before matters got to you in the development of policies, programs, and procedures with respect to the revised desegregation plan? A. Okay, say your first part again? Q. Did he tell you that before things came to the board for approval--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 58 A. Uh-huh. Q. that the Joshua Intervenors would have a role in the development of programs, policies, and procedures? A. Not in those specific words. Q. In any words did he tell you that? A. It was my understanding that it would be ah, a cooperative effort and that I am, you would receive as much information as we could possibly get to you and that and, you know, we were going to work on this together. Q. Now what was your source of that information Mrs. Magness? A. Well, this whole document. Q. That's fine. were you informed by Dr. Corinine that we were being so involved? A. That was my understanding. Q. Did you receive, were you aware of a statement that we made--were you aware of the statement that I made before the board that I refer to on July 22, 1999 that we were not being involved in the planning\ndo you recall me--let me just draw my attention to this right here. In bullet number 4 down here, this is response #2 and #17 to your answers to interrogatories. The four little squares is what I'm referring to. A. I know, I just wanted to read the rest of it. Q. I don't want you to read the rest of it right now, I'll give you a copy of it and you have, we have given all of these to your lawyer so if they want to share it with you they can. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 59 But do you recall me appearing before the board and telling you in 1999 that we were not being involved? A. I'm trying to remember if I was at that board meeting. Q. That's fine. Well, the minutes will reflect but you don't recall it right now do you? A. Not at this moment. Q. I'll take that back then and Mr. Fendley, I would appreciate if you would ask him to share all these answers to interrogatories with you all. A. Which bullet were you talking about on here? Q. The fourth down that's square, down at the bottom. A. Oh, on the very bottom. Q. It says that the Joshua Intervenors were not being involved. A. Well, am I missing it. Q. If you will show to me and I'll show it to you what I'm talking about. A. Oh, okay, just that one little sentence. Q. Yes, ma'am. Well, there were several others. \"We all agree that Dr. Roberts role was to be more significant and had not been significant.\" Well, I won't go--you just don't have a recollection of that and that's understandable. Were you informed that the Joshua Intervenors were go be involved in the compliance program and trying to see to it that things worked? A. In what ways? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 60 Q. Based on your understanding from Corinine or anybody in 1999, did you have an impression as to the role of the Joshua Intervenors with respect to help and to work things out? A. umm, yes, that--- Q. All right. A. yeah. Q. All right. Now was it your understanding that there were Compliance Committee meetings going on throughout this period? A. That's right. Q. Were you aware that the Joshua Intervenors sought to be involved in those meetings? A. Yes. Q. Were you aware that we were denied that privilege? A. Yes. Q. What would be the reason for keeping Joshua out of those compliance meetings when the purpose of the plan was for us to work together? A. Because that was an internal working committee--Q. That's fine. A. that needed to work through problems and offer, and come up with solutions and then at that point I would think would be the time your involvement would be needed. Q. I see. But you were aware that Mr. Fendley was involved in those meetings were you? A. Yes. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 61 Q. I see. What was it--- A. Well, not all of them I don't think was he--I don't know. Q. Well, didn't he have a role in that committee? A. I understood that he did attend, I don't know that he attended every one of them. Q. What was it that Mr. Fendley could contribute to that committee that even approach what I could contribute to it? A. [Laughing]. Q. I'm talking about I'm another party, we're trying to work things our--- A. Uh-huh. Q. he's simply the lawyer and the understanding was that we are trying to work these things out so that when they come to the board that can become a beta comply and if there are difference at that time we'll bring them to the attention of the board so the board can make the judgment, what was wrong with that approach? A. It was nothing wrong with that approach and it should have been done but I still didn't feel like that you should be sitting in on the compliance meetings. Q. That's fine. A. I mean if you want to work on things for the districts and programs and things we can do at your office and we'll be glad to come down and sit in on it. Q. Were you aware that we did it, that we were involved in a Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box t4 sweet Horne , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 62 number of the committees of the board? A. Yes. Q. Well why, if we can be involved in helping to deal with then handbook--- A. Uh-huh. Q. and with the Research Committee--A. Uh-huh. Q. other things, what made compliance, those were compliance issues, what made compliance off limits? A. It was not off limits. The committee which was made up of the, as I understand it, the senior administrators whose responsibility was to see that this program was done. It was their meeting to discuss with, you know, among themselves, be sure that communication was going back and forth from all the different divisions, being sure that we were doing this the best we could and then, I mean we weren't in on any of those either, board members were not\nnobody was in on those. Q. Did you expect that the superintendent would be involve? A. He would have to be kept up to speed on it. Q. I see. So you're letting three or four people talk about, and Mr. Fendley talk about compliance issues and then maybe you would share some of those wi th us? Was there a party less integral to the whole process than the Joshua Intervenors? FENDLEY: Was there a party less integral? Q. Less integral to whole process than the Joshua--cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 63 A. What does that mean? Q. If you don\"t understand it then I'll go on. A. I don\"t understand, less integral. Q. integral. Did you ever receive any reports from the Compliance Committee? A. Yes. Q. In a public board meeting? A. Yes. Q. And they told you what they were doing? A. Yes. Q. So those ought to be reflected in the minutes? A. Well, let me back up to say that what were was getting was ah, reports our regular agendas about ah, Mr. Babbs would make a report and there were times when we would get reports from different of the associate or assistance, which was the second, the next one down as to what was being done in their division\nyes. Q. Now the only thing I recall those things being were statements by Mr. Babbs telling you that he had met with Dr. Roberts, he had picked him up at the airport or--- A. We heard from Dr. Roberts. Q. wait a minute, I'm talking about the compliance and that ah--- A. That's all part of it. Q. you had a meeting but nothing substantively ever appeared Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 64 on your agenda. Well, let me say if it did ah, we ought to be able to get it. So you're saying that you received reports from Mr. Babbs substantive in nature dealing with the Compliance Committee activities and I'm accepting that--- A. No, wait, wait, wait, wait--- Q. so I'm asking now Mr. Fendley--A. back up. Q. for copies of all those things. A. Hold it. SPRINGER: The minutes, we can get the minutes. A. I didn't, I did not say that. I said we got reports from the Compliance Committee, I didn't say it was about their activities. Q. Well, what else would it be now you\"re getting upon the stand--- A. Okay, it would be like policies and procedures and programs and test results and Dr. Roberts and different things that were going on within the district that were necessary and needed to help us to comply with what we have said we would do\nthat's what I meant Mr. walker. WALKER: All right. Then I would like to get Mr. Fendley, copies of all the reports that were sent by Mr. Babbs to the board members that had been to the board meetings regarding the Compliance Committee. MAGNESS: There are none regarding the Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 65 Compliance Committee. Q. Well Mrs. Magness, my question deal with what reports did you get from Mr. Babbs or anyone else regarding the Compliance Committee and its work. And you\"re telling me now that they sent various things to you and I just like to have a copy it, that's all. A. No, I did not say that. Q. Well, tell me again what you said. A. I said that we received in our regular board meetings much of the business that we conducted had to do with policies, procedures and programs that were put in place to comply with this report. And yes, we did receive and interim report and you have a copy of that and then we received a draft, and then we received a final report\nso yes, you have all those. Q. So that\"s all you say you received? A. That's all I can think of at the moment. Q. Did you ever ask him what his committee did to address the issue of remediation of achievement disparities? Did you ever ask him that question yourself? A. Not that specific question, no. Q. Did he ever give the board a report on what he and the committee had determine needed to be done in order to remediate the achievement disparities of African-American students? A. Did Mr. Babbs say that? Q. Yes, ma'am. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY 66 A. No. Q. All right. Now did anybody representing the Compliance Committee address that subject before the board? FENDLEY: When you say representing you mean on behalf of the--- WALKER: On behalf of--yes, yes. A. I don't think I understand that question. Q. Well, if Mr. Babbs wasn't there did someone else appear and give a Compliance Committee report? A. No. Q. Did Mr. Babbs ever tell you that there was an annual assessment as provided by 2.7 and 2.71 or all programs in the district? A. No. Q. Did anybody on the Compliance Committee ever address the issue of annual written assessment as contemplated by 2.7 and 2. 71? A. Not in specific relation to all programs. Q. That's right. A. No. Q. Did they ever provide a writing indicating that the Compliance Committee had made an assessment of any program and determined that it was not working? A. No. Q. Did they ever make an assessment of any program and Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CERTIFIED COPY determine that it was working? A. Q. A. The Compliance Committee? Yes, ma'am. No. WALKER: All right. No more question. FENDLEY: No questions. 67 [The deposition ended at 2:27 p.m., October 5, 2001.]  * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax \u0026lt;e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (- 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 CERTIFIED COPY 68 SIGNATURE PAGE I, JUDY MAGNESS, hereby certify that the above and foregoing deposition is a full, true, correct and complete transcript of the proceeding [mark the appropriate box]: ( ) had at the time of the taking of my deposition. (OR) (~ubject to the notations on the attached Errata Sheet made by me or at my Date STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI direction. Hffk~ ss. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a Notar!.(,Public in Notary Public MY COMMISSION (SEAL) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 CERT\\F\\ED COPY 69 ERRATA SHEET (Upon completion, please sign and date this sheet below.) Page K Line _L Page ___:)_ Line JL Page~ Line 21_ Page :f5_ Line 2- Page _d!j_ Line.:\n._ Page P]_ Line _/3_ Page j_ Line ~ Page i3 Line i Page Line Page Line Page Line Page Line Change: To: c..a,11,, Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: does To: 0 Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: (t! tt'il) '\n, e. To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Date Cobb Court Reporting P , O. Box t 4 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax Page I of I - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 CERTIFIED COPY 70 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. 429-84-1622 COUNTY OF PULASKI I, Gloria Y. Cobb, A Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the aforesaid County and state, do hereby certify that the witness, JUDY MAGNESS, was duly sworn by me prior to the taking of testimony as to the truth of the matters attested to and contained therein\nthat the testimony of said witness was taken by me in stenomask and was thereafter reduced to typewritten form by me or under my direction and supervision\nthat the foregoing transcript is a true and accurate record of the testimony given to the best of my understanding and abili ty. I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this proceeding was taken\nand, further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, nor financially interested, or otherwise, in the outcome of this action\nand that I have no contact with the parties, attorneys, or persons with an interest in the action that affects or has a substantial tendency to affect impartiality, that requires me to relinquish control of an original deposition transcript or copies of the transcript before it is certified and delivered to the custodial attorney, or that requir es me to provide any service not available to all parties to the act. My Commiss i on Expires: January 16, 2007 Cobh Court Re porting P , o. Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eBushman Court Reporting\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1237","title":"Oral deposition of Larry Berkley","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":["Bushman Court Reporting"],"dc_date":["2001-10-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","School board members","Court records","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Oral deposition of Larry Berkley"],"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/1237"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDeposition taken at the Friday, Eldredge and Clark Law Firm, Little Rock, Arkansas\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n   CERTIFIED COPY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF vs No.LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO . 1, ET AL DEFENDANT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS INTERVENORS DEPOSITION OF MR. LARRY BERKLEY DATE: October 5, 2001 TIME: 10:21 a.m. PLACE: The Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm 400 west Capitol, Suite #2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 APPEARANCES On Behalf of the Plaintiff: On Behalf of the Defendants: Mr. John w. Walker, Attorney John w. Walker Law Firm 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Clay Fendley, Attorney Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 west Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 ALSO PRESENT Joy Springer, The John w. Walker Law Firm Tony Rose, Sue Strickland, \u0026amp; Katherine Mitchell, Deponents Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 2 CERTf Ff ED COPY PAGE AGREEMENT OF COUNSEL ..................... 3 SWEARING OF THE WITNESS. EXAMINATION OF MR. LARRY BERKLEY  .   . . .  . . . .    3 By Mr. Walker ..................... 3-38 SIGNATURE SHEET. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 0 ERRATA SHEET. . . . . . . . . . . COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION .. * * * * * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax . . . 41 . 42  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CE TIFIED COPY 3 STIPULATIONS The deposition of Larry Berkley, produced, sworn and examined at the Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm, 400 West Capitol, Suite #2200, Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 commencing at 10:21 a.m., on October 5, 2001, in the captioned cause at the instance of counsel for the Plaintiff, and said deposition being taken according to the terms and provisions of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. It is stipulated and agreed all forms and formalities in the taking, transcribing, forwarding and filing of said deposition by witness, are hereby waived by the parties, the right being expressly reserved to object to the testimony of the witness at the time of trial as to incompetency, irrelevancy and immateriality, other than those with respect to the form of questions as propounded to the witness. * * * * * P R O C E E D I N G S THEREUPON, LARRY BERKLEY having been called for examination by counsel for the plaintiff, and having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION Questions by Mr. Walker: Q. Mr. Berkley, you have given depositions before have you Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 4 not? A. Yes. Q. I'll just go straight to the issue. How long have you been a member of the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District? A. Five years. REPORTER: Both of you speak up a little bit, please. A. Okay. I've been on it five years. Q. Do you hold an office on the board? A. Not at this time. Q. Have you ever served as either president or vice president of the board? A. Both. Q. When were you president of the board? A. '98 I think. I'll have to go back and look at the records. Q. All right. A. Yes, okay. I'll lean forward. Q. Do you hold an office at that time? A. I do not. Q. What is your education? A. I have a Masters Degree in Physics from the University of Missouri and a bachelors degree and masters degree in physics. Q. What work do you do? A. I'm a medical physicist. I'm Vice President of Medical Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Physics and Engineering at CARTI. Q. I see. Is that with UAMS? 5 A. we have a facility at UAMS but CARTI in independent of all the facilities that we serve. Q. I see, all right. Mr. Berkley are you familiar with the revised desegregation and education plan? A. Yes. Q. Have you and the board members had occasion to, as a board in a public meeting, ever discuss that plan together as a board since 1998? A. we have received regular updates from administration and from the consultants and--- Q. I understand, my question though doctor, Mr. Berkley, have you and the other board members in a public session ever had occasion to discuss that in a public setting? FENDLEY: I'm going to object to the--Q. Not simply to receive reports. A. Well, in conjunction with receiving those reports and I believe there was some discussion related to the management study that we had done that related to the deseg plan. Q. Have you had occasion to receive information that, from you lawyers in a public session regarding the revised desegregation and education plan in so far as its implementation was concerned? I'm talking about in a public meeting instead of one-on-one? Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 6 A. I believe there have been updates from them. Q. In a public meeting? A. I honestly can\"t recall that. Q. Have you and the board members before today ever met with the lawyers privately regarding the revised desegregation and education plan? A. Privately? Q. Yes, sir. FENDLEY: Do you mean independently or together? WALKER: Two persons at one time at any time or more. A. I do not recall doing that. Q. I see. Has it been your practice as a board that whenever two board members met that you would give notice to the press of that meeting? A. Ah, it is our practice yes. Q. I see. Has it been your practice that you would do that even if it were for something as mondain as lunch? A. As a general rule, yes\nthere may have been exceptions to that. Q. I see. Do you know under the Freedom Of Information Act the only exception is to discuss personnel matters? FENDLEY: Object as to form. Q. You may answer. A. I believe that there is some, one interpretation of that Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 7 that says that. Q. Mr. Berkley do you recall being informed by Dr. Les Carnine that the district had substantially complied with the expectation of the revised desegregation and education plan? A. Yes. Q. When did he do that? A. I can\"t give you a date. Q. All right. Did he do it over a period of time? A. We have had regular reports from the administration particularly Mr. Babbs ah, that's a regular part of our meetings. Q. Well, I understand that. Did Mr. Babbs or anyone else inform you and the other board members in a public session and all my questions will be about public sessions because I presume you all cannot act in private? A. That's correct. Q. That the requirements of the revised desegregation and education plan had been fulfilled? A. I don't recall the exact words but I think substantial compliance is the corrects words. Q. Okay. Do you recall that I've appeared before the board on several occasions to complain that the plan requirements were not being met? A. You? Q. Yes, sir. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 44 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY a A. I remember you coming to the board concerned about ah, a position be potentially eliminated as a result of the management plan that we had done. Q. Is that all you recall about that meeting? A. Yes. Q. I see. We have prepared responses to your counsel's interrogatories. Have you seen the interrogatories which were prepared by your counsel and submitted to the Joshua Intervenors? BERKLEY: umrn, have I seen it? REPORTER: I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. FENDLEY: I don't think you have. A. No. Q. I want to show--- FENDLEY: I\"m not suppose to answer, if you don't recall--- BERKLEY: I don\"t recall, I don\"t recall seeing them. Q. I see. In order to refresh your memory about that meeting I give you a response to those interrogatories, Response #2 to Interrogatory #7, this is the response to interrogatory #2 and #17. And this purports to be a tape, \"tape of John Walker before LRSD School Board July 22, 1999\", that was prepared by the secretary of the district. Would you look at that and see, it's four pages, would you look at that for a moment and see if Cobb Court Reporting P , o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 9 it refreshes your recollection. A. This is something at King School? Q. Just look at it and see if it refreshes your recollection. FENDLEY: Do you want him to read it all? WALKER: No, just, just--- FENDLEY: Well, what do you want him to do with it? WALKER: Well, if he want's to, he can read it if he wishes. I presume he reads fast, he's a physicist. FENDLEY: He can read it at whatever pace he pleases. A. I do recall you coming to the board with concerns--- Q. No, my question was does that refresh your recollection? A. About ah, you coming to the board another time about some concerns at Hall High. Q. Did this refresh your recollection about complaints that we were making regarding implementation as early as July 22, 1999\ndoes this refresh your recollection? A. No. Q. That's fine. Now did you ever--you were the president during that year weren't you? A. I can look and see. Q. '99 to 2000? A. August '99, that would have been '98, '99? Q. Well, this was July. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 10 A. July '99 I would have been president. Q. Yes, sir. A. That's right. Q. All right. Now do you remember as president of the board ever asking Dr. Carnine or any administrator to respond to the comments that I had made after giving them thoughtful consideration on July 22, 1999? A. No. Q. Do you recall any board member ever asking the administration to give any response to the board to any of the comments that I've made regarding criticisms with implementations of the desegregation plan? Any written, anything to the board members or any staff members regarding those things? FENDLEY: I'm going to object, I'm not sure I understand the question. WALKER: Well, let me make sure you understand. Q. Now usually when people appear before the board unless it's a matter where some person has a particular comment to be made, you all generally say nothing\nisn't that generally what happens? A. When the public comes before the board? Q. Yes. A. Yes. Q. All right. Now isn't it also fair to say that when I have Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72 164-000 4 Pho ne : (50 1 ) 490 - 00 66 (50 1 ) 490 -0 92 6 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY appeared before the board most of the board members have basically been silent. A. I wouldn't--- Q. That's fine. A. make a statement like that. 11 Q. Have you all, when I've come before the board especially in July and made these kinds of complaints about nonimplementation, is it fair to say that you did not ask Dr. Carnine or any other administrator to give a response to these considerations at that time? A. I can't speak for the other board members. Q. But you didn't did you? A. I did not\nno, sir. Q. All right. Now do you know of any official action being taken with respect to the remarks made by the Joshua Intervenors, myself, or Mrs. Springer at any time as a board? A. As a board? Q. Yes, as a board. A. And official action by the board--Q. Yes, sir\nyes, sir--- A. in response to your request? Q. Yes, sir. FENDLEY: And let me just clarify, a request made to the board at a meeting? WALKER: Or comments, yes. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 12 FENDLEY: So you\"re talking about at a meeting? WALKER: At a meeting, any public session\nyes. A. I do not recall any official action by the board. Q. I see. Now do you recall that we have consistently told you that the plan required the involvement of Drs. Roberts and Ross in the divination and promulgation of policies, programs, and procedures as contemplated by the revised desegregation plan? A. I remember reading your words about your interpretation of the plan that you should be involved with that. Q. Well, what about the, you do not recall me having said on the 22nd that ors. Roberts and Ross would be integrally involved and there was an understanding that these two persons would have a role in planning, development and divination of new policies, programs, and procedures for moving us beyond where we were into where we wanted to be\nyou don\"t recall that? A. I don\"t recall that but it does make sense. Q. Pardon? A. It does make sense. Q. It does? A. Yes. Q. I see. Now have you had a report from anyone setting forth whether or not Dr. Roberts was involved in the establishment of policies, programs and procedures regarding the revised Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 13 desegregation plan, did anybody tell you that he was involved? A. No, sir but I will say this: I asked Dr. Roberts in a public meeting and at least one occasion, I think more than one occasion whether he had any concerns about our compliance with the plan and he said no. Q. Well, did you ask him whether he was involved? A. Well, I would assume that that would part of compliance. Q. Well, did he have, what was his role, what was your understanding if his role with respect to developing policies, programs, and procedures by which to implement the desegregation plan\nwhat was your understand was his role, not whether or not he had some concerns? A. My understanding was that he was an individual that you had approved and that the administration and you and he would decide what was appropriate. Q. That's fine. That was your clear understanding wasn't it? A. I can't tell you details about what his involvement should be or should have been but he is an individual who you approved and we agreed would be a good person to take on that task and during the course of those years except for these ah, few exceptions that you\"re referring to, we didn't hear much from you. Q. Is it your belief that you didn\"t hear much from me? Did you not get numerous--- A. We had public meetings twice a month for three years. Cobb Court Reporting p , o . Box H Sweet Horne , AR 7216 4-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 14 Q. Did you not receive reports from Dr. Carnine that he was meeting with me from time-to-time? A. Oh, yes. Q. So would you not have been hearing from me in that way? Let me go on to something else. Did you get the impression that Dr. Carnine was an honest and candid man? A. Yes. Q. Did you get the impression that he was giving you full reports regarding and accurate reports regarding implementation of the plan? A. He had delegated that primarily to Mr. Babbs. Q. I see. Did you get the impression that Mr. Babbs was a knowledgeable and competent person that could perform the task that you all assigned him? A. Yes. Q. I see. Were you in court when his testimony was given after ah, in July? A. I was not. Q. I suppose you read his testimony? A. I have not. Q. Has anyone given you an appraisal of his testimony or a summary of his testimony regarding program implementation? A. No official. Q. I see. Anybody unofficially? A. Ah, I wouldn\"t want to say that. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 4 5 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 15 Q. I see. Now the plan calls for, does it not call for remediation of achievement disparities between African-American and none African-American students? A. The revised desegregation plan? Q. Yes, sir\nyes, sir. A. I think it refers to attempts to do that. Q. I see, that's fine. Is it your position that you all did not commit to address elimination of the disparity between black and white achievement? FENDLAND: I'm going to object to the form--WALKER: You can still answer. FENDLAND: in that it did not address that, we committed to--- WALKER: I notice Mrs. Magness shaking her head while your deposition is being given, so that's fine\nshe can do that. A. we ah--- Q. or is it your position, you've heard her statement--FENDLAND: I'll note for the record that he can't see Mrs. Magness, she's sitting behind me. WALKER: I saw Mrs. Magness shaking her head like this--- FENDLAND: Well now, that doesn't matter. Q. Well now you heard Mrs. Magness' statement, I'll just change the question, you heard Mrs. Magness' statement in ah, Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 16 the public meeting the other night when Dr. Darty made his comments and when Mr. Curris made his comments--- A. Uh-huh. Q. that the plan did not require elimination or addressing African-American achievement disparities\nyou heard that didn't you? FENDLAND: Let me--- A. Is this my testimony of Mrs. Magness? Q. Did you hear her, did you--- FENDLAND: Let me object to the form of the question, please. You asked address, you asked two questions. WALKER: I'll change it but before I ask this question do you all plan to make the e-mails available after March 15th? FENDLAND: In accordance with the court's order. WALKER: After March 15th? FENDLAND: We'll let you know that sometime today. WALKER: I may have to then, continue these depositions after today because I don\"t want to go into things that are not, the court's not going to let us address and she said that you couldn't have it both ways. FENDLAND: I understand. WALKER: All right. FENDLAND: And I don't mind telling you more Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 11 than likely we're going to go with her option 2. them in? WALKER: Which is to let them in? Not to let FENDLAND: Not, not--WALKER: That's fine. FENDLAND: no e-mails after March 15th. WALKER: That's fine. Q. Now you\"re familiar with the revised plan and I'm just going to put it--you have it in front of you I see\nall right. Can you draw my attention to the section that deals with remediation of achievement disparities and to help you I'll suggest that it's around 2.7. A. Right. Not around 2.7, it is 2.7. Q. I see. A. Designed to improve--Q. Yes, sir. A. and that does not mean it is a commitment to achievement. Q. All right. Little Rock show imple,emt programs designed to improve and remediate the acievement desparities, the academic achievement. Do you take the position that the district has not agreed to make a conscienous effort to eliminate achievement disparities between the races? A. Say that again, please. Q. Do you take the position that the district has not agreed to make a conscienious effort to eleminate the achievement Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY disparities between the races? A. I believe that the deseg, revised deseg plans speaks for itself. Q. Let me ask it again. 18 A. The commitment is to design program with the intent to reduce the disparity. The difference is ah, is there anything in the plan which requires us to achieve that reduction in disparity. We did make a commitment to design the programs to attempt to remove the disparity. Q. Do you agree that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improving AfricanAmerican achievement? A. Say that again. Q. Do you agree that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improve AfricanAmerican achievement? A. Oh, that's not the only legitimate way, it's the only acceptable way. Q. Is that the only legitimate way? A. You can reduce the performance of the non-African-American kids and reduce the disparity. That's not acceptable but it's legitimate. Q. I see. Now do you recall that there was a brief submitted in 1998 which recognized that the Court Of Appeals said that you could not retreat, the board could not retreat from among Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 19 other things the agreed effort to eliminate disparity between the races, it didn't say--let me show you. A. This is germaine to this revised deseg plan? Q. I'm asking you do you agree that the 8th Circuit has indicated that there would be no retreat approved from the agreed effort to eliminate achievement disparity between the races? A. If that's what you say\nI wasn't aware of it before that. Q. You weren't? Well, are you aware of the brief that your counsel prepared in conjunction with me and submitted to the court, this is for everybody so I won't have to go over it again. \"The 8th Circuit identified seven elements of the LRSD's existing desegregation obligations which it considered crucial, and with respect to which no retreat should be approved. Id. at 256. Those elements were: (1) double funding for students attending incentive (virtually all-black) schools\n(2) operation of the agreed number of magnet schools according to the agreed timetable\n(3) operation of the agreed number of interdistrict schools according to the agreed timetable\n(4) intradistrict desegregation of PCSSD according to the agree timetable\n(5) the agreed effort to eliminate achievement disparity between the races\n(6) the agreed elements of early childhood education, at least in the incentive shcools\nand, (7) appropriate involvement of parents.\" were you aware of that? I'll show it to you [hands Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CE. TIFIED COPY 20 document to wi tness]. A. 1998? Q. Yes, sir. A. Okay. Q. were you aware of it? A. No. Q. All right. Now with respect to the plan itself which you have before you, look at it on page 1, were you aware that this plan requires that the orders of the District Court and Court of Appeals interpreting or enforcing sections A through D above will be in effect followed? A. Yes. Q. All right. Now do you still take the position as Mrs. Magness stated, as I understand she stated in a public board meeting that you all simply had to make an effort to do it\ndo you take that position that you simply can make an effort to do it and then fulfill the expectations of this case? A. The way I understood what that said is that shall not retreat from the effort to do that. Q. Okay. A. And I don\"t believe that we have done that. Q. Well, I take it that you all do not agree that you are required to eliminated the achievement disparity? A. Read the whole thing. Q. I'm asking do you, I'm asking you now do you--first of all Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED copy 21 did you ever agree to eliminate the achievement disparity at least to the extent in the state's settlement agreement--- A. Ah, as I recall that is a fuzzy, the end point was not clearly defined. Q. Did it not say that the achievement disparity would be eliminated to the point there would--- A. How do you define that, that--- Q. That's fine. A. My understanding that the issue was that at the end point was not clearly defined\nthere\"s the problem. Q. I see. Well have you all, during the intervening years, ever sought as a public board to define the end point? A. Nope. Q. I see. Why haven\"t you done that and why haven\"t you as a board member sought to have it done? A. Because it's not a trivial thing to do. Q. But it's twelve years 1989 until now and in twelve years you could have addressed it as a board, could you not have? A. we could have but I don't think that we--- Q. That's fine. A. we are not educators, we are not experts in how you would define such a thing like that. Q. I see, that\"s fine. Now Mr. Berkley can you tell me what programs were specifically developed by which to eliminate achievement disparity between the races for which you have seen Cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY an evaluation? Have you ever seen any of the evaluations of any programs? A. Yes, but I don't recall the detail of those. 22 Q. Are you familiar, I call you attention to page 148 of your March 15 program? FENDLAND: Which one? REPORTER: I'm sorry, I didn't hear you? FENDLAND: I said which one. WALKER: Well, let me go back, let me go back to that\nthank you Mrs. Springer. Q. Can you identify any programs which were designed to eliminate achievement disparity between the races? A. In particular ah, I don't know if you would call it a program but a process to ah, ah, increase the participation of African-American kids in ah, pre-AP and AP classes. Q. I'm asking you about a program to remediate the achievement disparities--- A. Well, that's the intent, that's the--- Q. So your answer is that putting more black kids into pre-AP and AP courses, is that your answer? A. That's the one I can think of right now. Q. Can you thi nk of any other program, is that a program or is that a process, did you say? A. I don't how you would define it, I think of it as a process. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 23 Q. Well, let me ask you. Has the board ever approved any program itself other than process for remediating achievement of African-American students? A program? A. Well, the Early Childhood Literacy Program, I think is intended to increase the reading level of all kids particularly those who are behind and the intent of that would be as well to reduce the disparity. Q. That was the intent, so that would deal with the pre-K kids, right? A. And up through 3. Q. Up through 3. Now what are the programs that apply to the children in grades 4 and 5 by which to remediate achievement disparities? A. There well may be but I don't recall that. Q. You don't know of any. Have you ever asked the question? A. I have not. Q. All right. What are the programs for remediating the achievement disparities of students who happen to be AfricanAmerican who are in special education? A. I don't recall specific programs. Q. I see. Do you know of any other programs which have been designed to eliminate achievement disparities between AfricanAmerican and white students or nonwhite students--nonblack students? A. I don't recall any right off. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72 164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 24 Q. I see. Now since one of your board members says the plan doesn't say you have to close the gap it says best effort, good faith effort, look at your plan and draw my attention to where those statements are made, please. A. You said 2.7. Q. 2.7 doesn't say that in my opinion, maybe if you want to say 2.7 I'll go on. A. Repeat your question, please. WALKER: Would you repeat it, please. [The reporter did as requested]. REPORTER: You may continue, sir. A. Well, there are several sections that can influence the--Q. No, I want you, I want you to just draw my attention--FENDLAND: Well, let him finish his answer, please. WALKER: Well that's fine, if you said there are several sections\njust tell me where those several sections are. A. You didn't let me finish. Well, influence the performance of the African-American kids including parential involvement, eligibility, and participation in extracurricular activities--Q. Just a moment, please listen to my question. FENDLEY: Well, are you finished Mr. Berkley? BERKLEY: Yes. Q. Well the point, now I want you to draw my attention to the Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 7216 4-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 4 90 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 25 sections of the plan which say that you do not have to actually close the gap but only as Mrs. Magness said, use your best effort and good faith effort to do so. I want to see any where in here where it said good faith effort and best effort to address achievement of the disparity gap? A. Well, there's a few places in this document that says that we do not have to do but I don't believe it says that. Q. Thank you. Now were you shown by any, by Dr. Carnine a program assessment each year of the academic programs which were in place for improving African-American achievement? A. No. Q. All right. 2.71 says that LRSD shall assess the academic programs implemented pursuant to 2.7 after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs in improving African-American achievement. As a board did you all ever do that after each year? A. You mean all programs? Q. Yes, sir. A. Evaluate all programs? Q. Well, the ones that were implemented pursuant to 2.7 in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs in improving African-American achievement, did you ever do that as a board? A. Not specifically that. Q. That's fine. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. we did review academic performance of African-American kids. 26 Q. My question was--well that fine, you said you reviewed it. Did any of those assessments reveal that a program was not and was not likely to improve African-American achievement, did you all make that kind of assessment? A. I don\"t remember that. FENDLEY: As a board? WALKER: As a board. A. I don't remember it. Q. Now did you see written assessments that you would contend as a board member and as a physicist which comply with 2.71 from your administrative staff on an annual basis? A. No, I don't recall all of the assessments that we got Mr. Walker. Q. Well, isn't it fair to say that you were never, that all of your assessments would have been presented to you in a public board meeting--- A. Yes. Q. or through the mail? A. Yes. Q. Okay. A. Now they would have been done in a public assembly. Q. And isn't it fair to say that you all never discussed in a public board meeting whether any program was improving African-cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 27 American achievement, any particular program? A. It would be fair to say that I don\"t recall that. Q. That's fine. Do you know of any particular program which has overall improved African-American achievement\na program, I'm not talking about a process now? A. But there are individual schools where we\"ve had programs that improved academic performance of African-American kids. Q. Well, can you tell me what those programs are? A. No, I don\"t recall those. Q. Can you tell me where those schools are? A. Not--- Q. All right. A. off the top of my head\nno. Q. All right. Are you aware of the test, the standardize test that were in place in 1989 at the time the commitment was made with the state in the original plan to remediate achievement disparities\nwere you familiar with the test that were in place at that time? FENDLEY: I'll object to the form of the question\nit assumes facts not in evidence. Q. Well all right, let me ask. You were aware that testing had been going in this school district long before you became a school board member? A. Correct. Q. And when you came on some five years ago which would have Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY been 1996, you were aware that the test in place that were standardize were nationally standardize test\nwere you not? A. Correct. Q. You were aware that they included at least the SAT IX? A. Correct. Q. And other SAT test? A. Right. 28 Q. I see. Did you know of any nationally standardize test that were being utilized by the Little Rock School District at the time you came onto the board? A. No. Q. I see. So if the plan, you said something about this being vague, so if the only standardize test being used were the SAT tests, would you not expect that those were the test that would have been the benchmark for determining improvement of remediation or remediation of achievement disparities between black and white students? FENDLAND: Let me object, the question calls for speculation by the witness on what drafters of the 1989 settlement agreement intended. Q. That\"s fine, that's fine. Now you can still go ahead and answer the question. A. Please repeat it. Q. The question basically is that those are the test in use, would you not--first of all are those tests still in use? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 29 A. Yes. Q. I see. Have you met with any school board members to change those tests for evaluation purposes? You and the board, have you all changed those tests for any reason, any purpose? A. Well, I think we\"ve reduced the number of tests\nI don\"t recall exactly which ones have been eliminated. Q. All right. But the test that were in place when you came onto the board are still in place, are they not? A. Right. Q. I see. Now has the board determined that it will change that particular test, the SAT IX test? A. I don\"t think so. Q. What is the purpose of giving these students the SAT IX test in the f i rst place in your opinion as a physicist and as a board member? A. A physicist doesn't have much to do with it. Q. Well, physicist suppose to be among our most bright people, most logical. A. It's to assess our performance relative to national norm. Q. That's right. And also to determine from year-to-year how students are improving their academic performance, isn\"t that correct? A. Yes. Q. All right. A. Hopefully improving. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Horne , AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 30 Q. I see. Now doesn't 2.1 say that if you find that programs are not working--- FENDLEY: 2.7.1. WALKER: 2.7.1, I\"m sorry. Q. Doesn't that in effect say that if your programs are not working you have to throw them out and get some others? A. It says either modifying how the program is implemented or replacing the program. Q. That's basically the same thing isn\"t it? A. No. Q. I see. Well have you all ever modified any program or replaced any program that you determined was not working--first of all did you all ever determine that a particular program was not working? A. I don\"t recall that. FENDLEY: Let me just clear up are you meaning the board rather than him? WALKER: Meaning the board, meaning the board. He can\"t act individually. A. No. I rely on the administrators to do that. Q. Have t he administrators ever come to you and told you that in their opinion after assessment or evaluation, particular programs were not working to improve African-American achievement? A. I don\"t recall that but I\"m sure that that kind of activity Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 31 goes on all the time. Q. Well, at least to the board it isn't. No persons on the administrative staff have come before the board to inform you that a particular program, any program has not worked and is not likely to work to improve African-American achievement? A. You know, I don't recall that but it could well be that when they introduce new programs that is, they wouldn't say this program is bad, they would say we're implementing a new progr am because we think it's better\nand that doesn't mean they didn't go through that process and I'm not aware of it. Q. This says that you shall assess the academic programs each year and then change it if it's not working. A. Right. Q. Now does that mean that you as a board tolerated change without an assessment? Change such as the one you mentioned, people coming up like Dr. Les was saying, well we think that this will be better than what we have\ntherefore, we don't need to make this assessment we'll just put this other thing in place? A. Mr. Walker I don't believe that happened. Q. I see. Well, you said that some people have come up, that means basically your instruction department doesn't it? A. Right. Q. And they\"ve come up with other programs, is that right? A. Right. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. But that, that was not after an assessment that preexisting programs were not working? A. I wouldn't make that assumption. 32 Q. I see. And you have not seen such an assessment have you? A. I don't recall seeing it. Q. That's fine. Now you understand, would you assume that under this plan the assessments that were being made ah, had to be documented? A. I don't know about that\nI don't know what the standard is as far as--there's all kind of program evaluations. Q. I see. A. There are informal program evaluations and there are formal evaluations. Q. What does your plan call for? A. It says evaluate. Q. Doesn't it say that the evaluation has to be pursuant--did you all as a board not adopt a particular writing regarding program evaluation, do you recall that? A. I recall implementing a program within the last couple of years for program evaluations. Q. Do you not recall specifically developing a program evaluation written format? A. I don't recall that\nno, sir. Q. Now as a physicist you know that if you're going to evaluate anything it has to be pursuant to and you evaluating Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 33 things in a series of things that are somewhat related, it has to be pursuant to criteria and standards that are uniformly applied, would you not say that? A. Sometimes. Q. Is that any reason why there should be education and then an investigation? A. Yes. Q. What's the reasons? A. It\"s a very different world. Q. Well, I mean what's so different about it? I mean, the, the, the--- A. Logic is highly quantifiable and there are a lot of things in education that are not quantifiable. Q. You assume that? A. No, I know that. Q. How do you know it? A. Oh, I work as a medical physicist and in medical physic there are a lot of things, biological things that are not quantifiable like there are in pure physics. Just as in education you can\"t define all the parameters, you can't measure every parameter and when you mix all these parameters together you, the end result is something which is sometimes not quantifiable. REPORTER: One moment. You may continue, sir. Q. Now I call your attention to page 148 and I show you thing Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 so you won't have any problem. A. What's is this document? CERTIFIED COPY 34 Q. That's in the report that you all submitted saying that you were ready for release from court supervision. A. Right. Q. That deals with program evaluation. Look at the bottom of the page, can you tell me, there is listed a number of programs that the district says it evaluated. A. Right. Q. Have you ever seen those evaluations? A. I don't recall Mr. Walker, we see lots of evaluations and lots of reports and I can't recall every one of them. Q. Now I\"ve been trying to see some of these evaluations, now I haven't seen them and I'm wanting to tell--if you tell me that you have seen them then that's fine. Just tell me which ones you have seen that you recall, any one that you recall seeing? A. I really can't tell you. Mr. Walker there's so much stuff that comes in front of us, by us that--- Q. Now you understand--- A. now I'm not going to say that I haven't seen something because--- Q. Well--- A. I don't remember a lot of what I've seen. Q. Were you aware that the judge had said that she's really Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 35 concerned about your evaluations, that's what we're focusing upon now--- A. Right. Q. and upon remediation efforts. A. Right. Q, All right. Now can you tell me as you sit here today Mr. Berkley before you go onto the stand if you go on the stand, if you before March 15 had seen any written evaluation of any of those programs that are listed there? A. Again Mr. Walker, I don't recall seeing them--Q. That's fine. A. but it could well be that I have seen them. Q. Well, I've given it to you so that you can refresh your--A. Okay. Q. Now you've met with Mr. Fendley before today haven't you? A. Correct. Q. You've had a chance to be made aware that the court was concerned about the evaluation issue. A. Correct. Q. All right. And not withstanding that meeting with Mr. Fendley and the court's concerns that were made known to you, you still can't come up with a single program evaluation that you've ever seen can you? FENDLEY: I'm going to object, he's asked and answered\nhe doesn't evaluation he's seen. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. But I'm asking right now, you've had a chance to--A. I'm not going to change my answer. 36 Q. you don't have to change your answer but he can't tell you not to change your answer\nI'm going to ask another question. Did you think about the issue of evaluation before you came to this deposition today? A. Before is a long time. Q. Before today. Anytime? A. I thought about it when the hearing was going on--Q. All right. A. and that there was concern about it. Q. All right. Now you were in court during that time--A. Some of that time--- Q. at least one day--- A. some of the time. Q. now since that time, being aware of the court's concern, can you say you have reviewed any evaluation that was in writing regarding any of the programs that are on page 148 of your report saying that you had done those things? A. I do not recall that. WALKER: That's fine. Just a moment. [A recess was taken at 11:14 a.m., proceedings resumed at 11:15 a.m., to-wit:] REPORTER: We are on the record, sir and you may continue. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY DIRECT EXAMINATION CON'T Questions by Mr. Walker Con't: 37 Q. Did you ever receive a report from any administrator that your Evaluation Department before March 15 was not performing at a professional level? FENDLEY: Object to the form, March 15 what year? WALKER: 2001. A. I did not receive a report that they were not performing as professionals. Q. I see. Do you have at this time at PRE Evaluation Department, PRE Department? A. I think that we are reorganizing it. Q. So that you don\"t have one? A. I think that--- FENDLEY: He's answered the question. WALKER: Just a moment, now. Q. I want you to tell me if you have a PRE Department in your opinion? A. In my opinion? Q. Yes, sir. A. I do not know that a department per sa exist. Q. I see. A. That does not mean that evaluations aren't going to happen. Q. What is the last date that you had an Evaluation Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 38 Department, a PRE Department? FENDLEY: Object, that assumes that we don't have one now which is not his testimony. REPORTER: You need to speak up. Q. What is the last date that you had a PRE staff of more than two people? A. I don't know. Q. What is the last date that you have had a conversation with any person in a PRE Department regarding PRE evaluation of programs that had the purpose of assessing the effectiveness of academic programs in improving African-American achievement? A. Repeat the question. WALKER: Would you do so? [The reporter did as requested.] REPORTER: All right, sir. FENDLEY: Let me say an objection as to the form of the question. Q. That's fine\nnow you can still answer. A. I don't recall a particular date. WALKER: All right, I don't have any more questions of you Mr. Berkley for right now\nthank you. Berkley. BERKLEY: Okay. FENDLEY: I don't have any questions of Mr. WALKER: Okay, you can go\ngood to see you. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone , (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 2001.] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 39 [The deposition ended at 11:17 a.m., October 5, * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P , o. Box f4 sweet Horne, AR 72164- 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax (- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (- 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 CERTIFIED COPY 40 ERRATA SHEET (Upon completion, please sign and date this sheet below.) Page ..!::L Line -1fL_ Page -:2.. ~ Line Zr::, Page ~s Line b Page ~3 Line '7 _ Page3\"3 Line _!X_ Page ss Line~ Page Line Page Line Page Li ne Page Line Page Line Page Line Change: 9o To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: -\\:14~1JlM+'b\\ cc.Q P 1 '2 dl \\ ~Ci-PV':f S.: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: Change: To: Reason: fo -\u0026lt;-4-0 / Page Date Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 CERTIFIED COPY 41 SIGNATURE PAGE I, LARRY BERKLEY, hereby certify that the above and foregoing deposition is a full, true, correct and complete transcript of the proceeding [mark the appropriate box]: ( ) had at the time of the taking of my deposition. (OR) (vr--subject to the notations on the attached Errata Sheet made by me or at my direction. /o- 2-le-\u0026lt;::\u0026gt; I Date ~~BERKLEY STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI ss. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a and for the aforesaid county and state on this of ~ Notary ttlic in J-\u0026amp;- day Notary Public MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: (SEAL) Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box J .4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 ERTIFIED COPY 42 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. 429-84-1622 COUNTY OF PULASKI I, Gloria Y. Cobb, A Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the aforesaid County and state, do hereby certify that the witness, LARRY BERKLEY, was duly sworn by me prior to the taking of testimony as to the truth of the matters attested to and contained therein\nthat the testimony of said witness was taken by me in stenomask and was thereafter reduced to typewritten form by me or under my direction and supervision\nthat the foregoing transcript is a true and accurate record of the testimony given to the best of my understanding and ability. I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this proceeding was taken\nand, further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, nor financially interested, or otherwise, in the outcome of this action\nand that I have no contact with the parties, attorneys, or persons with an interest in the action that affects or has a substantial tendency to affect impartiality, that requires me to relinquish control of an original deposition transcript or copies of the transcript before it is certified and delivered to the custodial attorney, or that requires me to provide any service not available to all parties to the act. My Commission Expires: Notary Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eBushman Court Reporting\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1239","title":"Oral deposition of Sue H. Strickland","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":["Cobb Court Reporting"],"dc_date":["2001-10-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","School board members","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Oral deposition of Sue H. Strickland"],"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/1239"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDeposition taken at the Friday, Eldredge and Clark Law Firm, Little Rock, Arkansas\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n   CERTIFIED COPY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF vs No.LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS INTERVENORS DEPOSITION OF MRS. SUE H. STRICKLAND DATE: Octobers, 2001 TIME: 11:22 a.m. PLACE: The Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law .Firm 400 west Capitol, Suite #2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 APPEARANCES On Behalf of the Plaintiff: On Behalf of the Defendants: Mr. John w. Walker, Attorney John W. Walker Law Firm 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Clay Fendley, Attorney Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 west Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 ALSO PRESENT Joy Springer, The John w. Walker Law Firm Tony Rose, Judy Magness, \u0026amp; Katherine Mitchell, Deponents Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 7216 4-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (50~) 490 - 0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 26 CERTIFIED COPY 2 AGREEMENT OF COUNSEL .. SWEARING OF THE WITNESS ... EXAMINATION OF MRS SUE H. STRICKLAND By Mr. Walker .. SIGNATURE SHEET .. ERRATA SHEET. COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION. * * * * * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P , o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax PAGE . 3 . . . . . . . 3 . . . 3-28 . . . . . . 2 9 .30 . 31  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 3 STIPULATIONS The deposition of Sue H. Strickland, produced, sworn and examined at the Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm, 400 west Capitol, Suite #2200, Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 commencing at 11:22 a.m., on October 5, 2001, in the captioned cause at the instance of counsel for the Plaintiff, and said deposition being taken according to the terms and provisions of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. It is stipulated and agreed all forms and formalities in the taking, transcribing, forwarding and filing of said deposition by witness, are hereby waived by the parties, the right being expressly reserved to object to the testimony of the witness at the time of trial as to incompetency, irrelevancy and immateriality, other than those with respect to the form of questions as propounded to the witness. * * * * * P R O C E E D I N G S THEREUPON, SUE H. STRICKLAND having been called for examination by counsel for the plaintiff, and having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION Questions by Mr. Walker: Q. Mrs. Strickland state your name for the record. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 4 A. Sue Strickland. Q. Mrs. Strickland do you take the position--what is your position about the board's obligation with respect to implementation of the revised desegregation plan and the court orders in this case, what is your position regarding that? FENDLEY: I object to the form. WALKER: Well, let me make sure we know, we\"re talking about the same thing. Q. Are you familiar with the revised desegregation plan? A. I am. Q. Are you familiar with the Court Of Appeals having set forth seven elements which your counsel agreed that could not be retreated from? A. I am aware. Q. Now what is your understanding of the board's commitment with respect to implementation of the revised desegregation plan and existing court orders? What are you all suppose to be doing? A. We\"re suppose to be implementing it to the best of our ability. Q. Do you understand that you have made, that you have agreed to make a specific effort to elimination achievement disparity between the races? Do you agree with that? Do you disagree with that? A. I\"m not sure exactly if it says that and--cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box H Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 5 Q. I see. A. I believe--- Q. I\"m sorry, go right ahead. A. I believe that it is our intent to close the gap as best we can. Q. Well--- A. To make a genuine effort. Q. Do you agree--well, were you told by Mr. Fendley and Mr. Heller that you had told Judge Wright in 1998 the following: The Eighth Circuit identified seven elements of LRSD's existing desegregation obligations which it considered crucial, and with respect to which no retreat should be approved. elements were: (1) double funding for students attending incentive (virtually all-black) schools, yes? A. Yes. Those FENDLEY: Let me just object to the form of the question to the extent you\"re asking about not communications between ah, either myself of Chris and Mrs. Strickland outside the context of a public board meeting. WALKER: Well, at any time, I mean I don\"t, I'm going to ask the question--- FENDLEY: Well, we're objecting, it\"s privileged. Q. Well, well, did you have any one-on-one meeting with Mr. Heller to discuss, I mean or Mr. Fendley to discuss the Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 6 commitments that were being made to the court back in 1999 or at any other time? A. Have been meetings with him, yes. Q. Do you, are you, were you aware of this public document which was presented to the court? Look at it. Since he\"s now dealing with the concept of privilege. FENDLEY: I just objected to the extent of your question because you just said any conversation. WALKER: Well my question--let me go on now. Q. The second element would be operation of the agreed number of magnet schools according to the agreed timetable? A. I was aware of this, yes. Q. Intradistrict desegregation of PCSSD according to the agree timetable? A. As me a question. Q. It's the same, these are the elements that you cannot retreat from. A. Right, I was aware of this, yes. Q. The agreed effort to eliminate achievement disparity between the races, were you aware of that? A. Let me read that. Q. Were you aware of that? A. Uh-huh. Q. Ma'am? FENDLEY: You need to speak up. Cobb Court Reporting P. o . Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. You have to say yes or no. FENDLEY: Well, if your answer is going to be yes or no, you need to say yes or no so she can take it down. 7 WALKER: To her without getting an answer from Mr. Fendland. A. I don\"t believe that, that I have ever seen it in writing where it says that you must close the disparity gap. Q. I\"m asking only about what is written before you. A. Uh-huh. Q. were you aware that that had been committed by your counsel? Yes or no. FENDLAND: I'm going to object to the form of the question. That's a quote from an Eighth Circuit opinion. Q. were you aware that this was committed in a paper prepared by your council? A. I was aware of the paper. Q. Were you aware of this particular commitment? FENDLAND: Object to the use of the term commitment. Q. Now you answered the first one Mrs. Strickland, number 1 and number 2, and number three and number 4 but when we get down to number 5 why can\"t you answer the same way? What makes that difficult? A. Well, I was not aware that it state, was stated exactly like that. Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 8 Q. That's right. But that is there now, this is a surprise to you isn't it? Yes or no. A. Probably, yes. Q. All right. Why is it a surprise Mrs. Strickland, why is that a surprise to you number 5, so that the record will be clear about what we\"re talking about it's the memorandum filed with United States District Court January 29, 1998. Why is that a surprise to you? A. I have never had any doubt in my mind that it was our intent to close the disparity gap as best we could. I have never seen anywhere saying that we\"re guaranteed that we're going to close this gap. Q. But number 5, this is the first time that you have been aware of it like being presented this way\nis that correct? A. That\"s probably, it's the first time I have read those words exactly like that. Q. That's fine. A. I was thinking that it was taking it more from the revised desegregation plan which is what we had said we were doing. Q. Do you agree that the only legitimate way to achieve elimination of the achievement disparity is by improving African-American achievement\ndo you agree with that? A. No, I don't. Q. That's fine. Now let me ask you if you have a gap between black and white students, let's say students, white students Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 9 are at the 60 percentile and blacks are in the 30 percentile and you want to achieve that gap, is it fair to say that you have to focus your attentions upon the students who are in the lower numbered? A. Certainly\nyes. Q. I see. That has to be the focus point of your efforts doesn\"t it more so than just continuing to do the same things you've been doing\nisn\"t that correct? FENDLAND: Object to the form. WALKER: I'll change the question. Q. If you\"re going to narrow the gap and raise the achievement of the ones in the bottom, you'd have to focus upon them don't you? A. I think so, yes. Q. All right. A. And I think we've done that. Q. But you don\"t recognize that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity is by improving African-American achievement? A. Well, I think--- Q. That's yes or no, I not asking for your opinion. FENDLAND: She can answer your question however she--- WALKER: This is a deposition--STRICKLAND: Uh-huh. Cobb Court Reporting P.O.Box#4 ' Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 10 WALKER: I\"m conducting this, this is not court. FENDLAND: Well, she--- WALKER: Do you agree--- FENDLAND: the witness can answer the question in anyway she feels. WALKER: You can ask her whatever you want to if you want to clear up anything\nthis is my deposition, this is discovery. FENDLAND: You can\"t tell the witness how to answer the question. Q. I\"m asking you now do you agree with the statement that the only legitimate means to eliminate the racial disparity in achievement is by improving African-American achievement? A. I think we have to improve African-American achievement\nthat is not the only way. Q. Do you recognize that your counsel has written that that's the only way? Read it down in the last paragraph. Read it. Were you aware that your counsel who has told you that you all are ready for unitary status had made that commitment? FENDLAND: Object, counsel didn't make any commitments. A. I think we\"ve done that, I think we've improved. Q. We didn't say improve, this doesn't say anything about improving. Your position seems to always be improving isn't it? Your whole statement is that you all are committed to Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone , (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 11 improving the educational options for black students? A. [Witness nodding head up and down.] REPORTER: Answer yes. FENDLEY: Object--WALKER: She nodded yes. FENDLEY: Well, let me object to the form of the question if that was finished. STRICKLAND: I think I was nodding that I was listening. Q. Well, let me ask you. Is it your position that you don't, you only have to make your best efforts to eliminate the gap, not to actually eliminate it\nis that your position? A. I think you have to make a genuine effort to do everything you can to help close that gap. Q. All right. Does that mean that you have to develop programs which are addressed and devoted to meeting the specific educational needs of the African-American children? A. I certainly do\nyes. Q. Can you tell me any program that the board has approved for eliminating, not improving, eliminating the gap\nname one program? A. I think everything we do. Q. You can't name a particular program can you? A. I think everything we do. Q. But I'm asking you right now can you name a particular Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 12 program? A. I have given you my answer. FENDLEY: She's answered the question. Q. I understand you have given me your answer, can you tell me any program that the board approved after January of 1998 which had that intended effect\nany particular program? A. Everything we do. Q. Well, just name the programs then. Name the programs. A. Everything we do\nyou have my answer. Q. Mrs., Mrs., Mrs. Strickland you got to name a program for me\ncan you name one program, do you know one program that you all do that has that purpose? A. Yes, all of them\neverything we do. Q. I see. Are you familiar with the evaluations that are set forth on page 148 of the March 15, 2001 report? A. Yes. Q. Have you ever seen a written evaluation of any of those programs that are set forth there? A. Yes, I have. FENDLAND: At the bottom of the page? Q. Yes, you\"ve seen that? A. Yes. Q. Name the ones you have seen. A. Well, I've seen a number of them. Q. Name the ones. Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box *4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 13 A. Understanding your school, I have the Hippy Program, the Charter school program ah, that's just the ones I think off the top of my head. The Model Inks--- Q. Go ahead, look at them all. A. English A Second Language, Campus Leadership. Q. You've come up with five. A. That's the ones I can think of off the top of my head but--- Q. I see. Now Mrs. Strickland--- A. I would say we've probably seen all of them. Q. Do you have a Hippy program? A. Well, yes. Q. You still have a Hippy program? A. Well, we cut it back tremendously. Q. Was it working to eliminate African-American achievement disparity at the time you cut it back? A. I really don't know. Q. Can you tell me which of these programs actually worked in your opinion to eliminate African-American Achievement disparities? FENDLAND: Which are the program on the bottom of 148? WALKER: That are listed on page 148\nyes. FENDLAND: Do you want to include all the ones that are discussed in this paragraph? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 14 WALKER: The ones at the bottom that are listed at 148. FENDLAND: The bullet points only. STRICKLAND: Uh-huh. A. Well, you know closing the disparity gap was a part of that program--- Q. I'm only asking you--- A. it's a part of everything. Q. Mrs. Strickland, I'm just asking you to tell me which of these programs had that result? FENDLAND: What result? WALKER: Of closing the disparity gap, that's what she said. Q. Which one of them had that, which ones of those had that result? A. Well, I believe most of the things we do helps to close that disparity gap. Q. Well, how do you measure the closing of the gap in your opinion? A. I don't r eally know. Q. Well, how can you say that it has that--A. When the scores have improved. Q. Let me ask you this. How can you make an assessment that the gap has been closed without knowing--- A. Ah, excuse me? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone: (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-092~ - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 15 Q. How can you make an assessment that the gap--are you saying that the gap has been closed? A. Nope. Q. I see. A. Did I say that? Q. Well, that's what I thought you were saying. A. I said it helps--- Q. I stand corrected. A. all of our programs helps to close that gap. Q. I see. Let me ask you, you've been on the board now seven years? A. Right. Q. What was the, what was the test in use for determining the standardize test in use at that time for assessing student achievement or student performance\nwhat was the test? A. Ah, I really don't know. Q. I see. Did the board ever discuss what test it would use for assessing or achieving, for assessing student achievement? Did you all ever have a public discussion regarding that? A. You talking about closing the disparity gap? Q. No, for just evaluating student performance, did you all ever discuss what test you all would use? A. Overall test? Q. Yes, ma'am. A. Well, we have a number of tests we use. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. But did you all as a board ever discuss those test? A. Discuss them in what way? 16 Q. Well first of all, can you identify the test that you understood, the standardize test that you all used say when you came onto the board\nwhat were they? A. SAT was one of them. Q. What else? A. Ah, I really don't remember but there were several. Q. I see. What--did you all as a board ever eliminate the SAT? A. I don't think so. Q. I see. Do you know of any other test by which the administration was directed to measure student achievement in 1995, 6, 7, or 8, you know any other test, standardize test? A. Well, we do ACTAP. Q. ACTAP, is that by 1998? A. I don't, I'm not sure what year it was started. Q. I see. A. SAT is really the only one I remember. Q. Mrs. Strickland do you know of any time the board ever addressed as a board the issue of whether any program that was in place was actually working to effectively either narrow or close the achievement disparity between black and white students, any program? Did you all ever have that discussion? A. We have discussed many times the closing the disparity Cobb Court Reporting P , o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COP 11 gap--- Q. Listen to my question. A. and our effort to do so. Q. My question is did you all ever assess as the plan says--FENDLAND: You meaning the board? WALKER: The board\nanytime I'm talking. Q. You understand we recognize that you can't make a judgment by yourself for the board can you? A. Right. Q. All right. FENDLAND: Ah,, I'm distinguishing between you meaning LRSD and you as the board. WALKER: The board, always. FENDLAND: Okay. Q. LRSD is the board isn\"t it? You all delegate everything to staff\nis that right but you are the responsible parties? A. We\"re the responsible parties. Q. All right. FENDLAND: Well, I'm making the distinction between you ask her did you, are you saying did anybody in the district do it or did the board do it? WALKER: The board. FENDLAND: Okay. Q. 2.71 says that the district shall assess the academic programs which were implemented pursuant to 2.7 after each year Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs and improving African-American achievement\nyou\"re familiar with that aren\"t you? A. Yes. 18 Q. Now in order to assess these programs they have to first be identified don't they Mrs. Strickland? A. [Witness nodding head up and down.] Q. Ma'am? REPORTER: Answer, yes. A. Yes. Q. All right. Can you identify the programs which were implemented that you all assessed? A. No. Q. Can you identi--you can\"t can you? A. No. Q. Now isn't it fair Mrs. Strickland to say that you all did not see annual assessments of all of the programs that you--you said earlier , now listen to what I'm saying, you said everything was supposed to be working toward that end didn't you? A. Right. Q. Now that meant then that you had to have an assessment every year under this of all those programs didn't you? FENDLAND: I'm going to object to the form of the question, that's a legal conclusion as to the meaning of Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 19 the--- Q. I'm asking you the question now\nhe can object at court and that's for the record of course. In your opinion you have to under this policy, you would have to make an assessment of each one of those programs every year wouldn't you? FENDLAND: The same objection. Q. You still have to answer the question. A. I have to answer the question? Q. Yes, ma'am. FENDLAND: If you understand it. A. I think the answer should be yes. Q. All right. Now isn't it fair to say that you never saw written assessments, let's talk about them unwritten later, but you never say written assessments of each one of these myriad programs, myriad meaning many, that were in operation in the school district on an annual basis did you? A. I don't remember seeing every one\nI remember some. Q. Well, we saw on page 148--- A. Uh-huh. Q. I think you identified five but you have far more programs than the dozen that are listed on this page don't you? A. Yes. Q. All right. And is it fair to say that you all never as a board made a judgment that a particular program was working to improve African-American achievement did you? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box 14 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 20 A. We did not. Q. All right. Can you tell me as you sit there which program, in your opinion according to the administrators especially Dr. Carnine, has worked to improve African-American achievement? Can you identify any particular program? FENDLEY: Let me object to the form if you're asking her to speculate which program Dr. Carnine thinks improved the performance. Q. I'm only talking about reports that were made to you by-you don't make assessment yourself do you Mrs. Strickland? A. I do not. Q. You only rely on those people you hire. A. That's right. Q. And they come to you as a board in a board meeting and make presentations. A. That's right. Q. All right. Now can you tell me any programs that they reported to you had been effective in improving AfricanAmerican achievement? I just want you to tell me yes, if there were some and which ones they were. A. No, I don't remember. REPORTER: You're going to have to speak up a little bit more for me. A. I'm sorry. I don\"t remember. Q. Now you understand that there have been a lot of program Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Horne , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY changes in the last three years, isn't that correct? A. That's right. Q. Now those program changes came about under Dr. Lesley didn't they? A. Yes, they did. 21 Q. And they came about without there having been an assessment of existing programs\nisn't that fair to say a written assessment that was presented to the board? A. I don't know. Q. Well, you don't ever remember seeing any written assessments made as contemplated by 2.7 and presented to the board do you? FENDLAND: I object to the form. Q. Now, you can answer the question. You don't remember seeing any of those do you? A. I don't remember. Q. All right. Now you don't just go and get rid of programs as a matter of routine unless you have made as an education an appraisal that those programs are not effective do you? That would be the normal expectation wouldn't it Mrs. Strickland? A. Yes\nright. Q. Now, but you all actually did that when Dr. Lesley came in because she said I think this can work better\nshe told you that didn't she? FENDLEY: Object, that is a compound question. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 22 Q. She has come--you a friend of Dr. Lesley's now aren\"t you? A. I am? Q. Are you not? A. I\"m an acquaintance of hers I think you would say. Q. All right. A. And I hope that I'm a friend to everybody at the school district. Q. You, you\"re my friend, at least you used to be my friend\nI haven\"t talked to you for the last couple of years but you-does Dr. Lesley attend your church? A. No. She visited with me one Sunday. Q. I see. That's sort of friendship, isn't it? A. Yeah, I consider\nyeah, I guess she's a friend. Q. And you all talk about school matters a lot don\"t you one-on- one? A. Well, if I have a problem with anything, I don\"t understand anything--- Q. You call her? A. Dr. Lesley is a good one for me to call. Q. I see. And you have more one-on-one communication with Dr. Lesley than any other school administrator don't you? A. No, I wouldn\"t say that. Q. Well, who else would you have more one-on-one communication with? FENDLAND: I think you need to define a time Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 23 period on that. WALKER: Well, I'll do that. Q. But at this time which board, which school administrator do you have the most one-on-one communication with? A. Probably the superintendent. Q. Okay, that\"s fine. Now before he came--no, in the first months after he came which school board member did you have-which school staff member did you have the most contact with? A. When he first, when, when who first came Dr. James? Q. Yes. A. Would you tell me where this is leading, I don\"t quite understand this? Q. I'm leading, I\"m trying to get up to the point of programs and I'll just go to it. A. Uh-huh. Q. Dr. Lesley told you did she not that she could put into place some better programs than the ones that were existence to help improve learning for all children didn\"t she? A. I don\"t think she\"s ever told me that\nno. Q. What did she tell you? A. I don't know\nwhat conversation you\"re referring to. Q. Well, did she ever tell you that the program that she contemplated would work better than the ones that were already in place in order to achieve improvement of African-American progress in schools? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 24 A. You mean, you\"re asking me if she told me that personally? Q. Yes, ma'am. A. I don\"t think so. Q. Did she ever tell the board that? A. I don't remember those words. Q. I see. Now--- A. But if I may clarify that, my assumption is anytime that a new program is implemented it's working toward that goal because we all know the deseg plan. Q. Well now, Mrs. Strickland you know that every time a new superintendent comes in you get new programs don\"t you? A. Well, that\"s true some time. Q. All right. Now you all don't just throw out programs that are working do you? A. we try not to. Q. All right. Did you have any programs before Dr. Lesley came that in your opinion had been or were successful in remediating African-American achievement, any one program? A. I can't think of one. Q. You can't think, now can you think of one since she's come that's been effective in remediating African-American achievement? A. I believe that our test scores are better. Q. No, we're talking about programs now rather than what somebody has told you or you believe represents better scores. Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY But the thing now, can you think of any program? A. No. 25 Q. All right. Now you talk about test scores, the only uniform test score that's been in place throughout these years has been the SAT hasn't it? A. I think so. Q. So if you're going to measure progress and you've been an educator at one time haven't you? A. R.ght Q. And what you try to look at as an educator is a continuum over, things over a period of time rather than a snapshot, isn't that correct? A. That's right. Q. All right. Now if test scores show basically flatness in terms of black achievement and white achievement over a continuum, does not that indicate that whatever gap existed is still there? A. If it\"s flat? Q. Yes, ma'am. A. Yes. Q. All right. Now has the board ever said that it's going to look at some other, that it's going to adopt a different appraisal system for determining remediation of the achievement gap? A. Not that I know of. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 26 Q. All right. Now with respect to evaluations Mrs. Strickland, you've always wanted to have people held accountable haven't you? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you also have always presumed that your people would be truthful haven't you\nthat is your administrators? A. That's right. Q. Did you find Dr. Carnine to be truthful in your opinion? A. Sometimes, no. Q. That's right. Did Dr. Carnine report to you that he was regularly meeting with John w. Walker with respect to the issues contained in the revised Desegregation and Education plan? A. He did. Q. I see. Did he tell you that I was i n agreement with what was going on? A. I don't know that he ever told us those words. Q. I see. Now did he tell you that program evaluation was proceeding as contemplated by the plan? A. Yes, I believe so. Q. You\"re aware now are you not that program evaluation was not proceeding as the plan required\nhave you been made aware of that? A. Well, I think that's a statement you\"re making. Q. Has anybody else representing the district told you that Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490- 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 21 the district court has found grave problems with your programs evaluations both existence of them and the substance of them\nhas anybody told you that? FENDLAND: Let me object to the form of the question. She hasn't been told that because the district court hasn't made those findings. Q. Well, have you been in court at any time? A. Not on this particular case\nnot this time. Q. Have any of your school board members told you that they have been in court and heard Judge Wright? A. I know some board members that have been in court. Q. I see. Did any of those board members represent to you or did the superintendent represent to you in any writing or statement that the court expressed grave concerns about the district evaluation program? A. I heard her remarks. Q. All right. Now is that anything that you know--now you understand with respect to program evaluation that you all have to have written evaluations as over against somebody's thought that this thing is working or not, there's a difference between somebody's opinion about whether something is working and whether or not an assessment has been made, a written assessment, an evaluation. FENDLAND: I'm going to object\nthat's a compound question. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 28 WALKER: I'll change it\nthank you. FENDLAND: You started asking one question and you changed. WALKER: You're absolutely right. Q. If someone, if you make a commitment to do program evaluation for instance as it is set forth here, those programs were to be--that's a program evaluation commitment isn't it Mrs. Strickland? A. Yes. Q. All right. That's from the plan isn't it? Now 2.7 is what it addresses and it says here that you shall assess the academic programs after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the programs and improving African-American achievement. It doesn't say anything about assessing the effectiveness of the programs from an effectiveness of white student improvement does it? It talks about improving black students, right? A. [Witness nodding head up and down.] Right. REPORTER: Answer, yes. A. Yes, I'm sorry. WALKER: All right. No further questions. FENDLAND: I don't have any questions. [The deposition ended at 11:55 a.m., October 5, 2001.] * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone , (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax ERTIFIED COPY 29 (- 1 ERRATA SHEET 2 3 (Upon completion, please sign and date this sheet below.) 4 5 Page Line Change: 6 To: 7 Reason: 8 Page Line Change: 9 To: 10 Reason: 11 Page Line Change: 12 To: 13 Reason: 14 Page Line Change: 15 To: 16 Reason: 17 Page Line Change: 18 To: 19 Reason: 20 Page Line Change: (- 21 To: 22 Reason: 23 Page Line Change: 24 To: 25 Reason: 26 Page Line Change: 27 To: 28 Reason: 29 Page Line Change: 30 To: 31 Reason: 32 Page Line Change: 33 To: 34 Reason: 35 Page Line Change: 36 To: 37 Reason: 38 Page Line Change: 39 To: 40 Reason: 41 42 Page of - 43 SUE H. STRICKLAND Date 44 Cobb Court Reporting P. 0. Box t4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 CERTIFIED COPY SIGNATURE PAGE I, SUE H. STRICKLAND, hereby certify that the above and foregoing deposition is a full, true, correct and complete transcript of the proceeding [mark the appropriate box]: had at the time of the taking of my deposition. (OR) subject to the notations on the attached Errata Sheet made by me or at my direction. - Date STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI ss. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a Notary Public in and for the aforesaid county and state on thi s o-\u0026lt;'7.\u0026lt;/o --u. of {Jc\n/: (SEAL) Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax day    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 CERTIFIED COPY 31 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. 429-84-1622 COUNTY OF PULASKI I, Gloria Y. Cobb, A Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the aforesaid County and state, do hereby certify that the witness, SUE H. STRICKLAND, was duly sworn by me prior to the taking of testimony as to the truth of the matters attested to and contained therein\nthat the testimony of said witness was taken by me in stenomask and was thereafter reduced to typewritten form by me or under my direction and supervision\nthat the foregoing transcript is a true and accurate record of the testimony given to the best of my understanding and ability. I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this proceeding was taken\nand, further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, nor financially interested, or otherwise, in the outcome of this action\nand that I have no contact with the parties, attorneys, or persons with an interest in the action that affects or has a substantial tendency to affect impartiality, that requires me to relinquish control of an original deposition transcript or copies of the transcript before it is certified and delivered to the custodial attorney, or that requires me to provide any service not available to all parties to the act. My Commission Expires: Cobb Court -Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eCobb Court Reporting\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1231","title":"Oral deposition of Tony Rose","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":["Cobb Court Reporting"],"dc_date":["2001-10-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","School board members","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Oral deposition of Tony Rose"],"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/1231"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nDeposition taken at the Friday, Eldredge and Clark Law Firm, Little Rock, Arkansas\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\n   CERTIFIED COPY IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF vs No.LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANT MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL DEPOSITION OF MR. TONY ROSE DATE: October 5, 2001 TIME: 12:38 p.m. INTERVENORS INTERVENORS PLACE: The Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm 400 West Capitol, Suite #2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 APPEARANCES On Behalf of the Plaintiff: On Behalf of the Defendants: Mr. John w. Walker, Attorney John w. Walker Law Firm 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Clay Fendley, Attorney Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 west Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 ALSO PRESENT Joy Springer, The John w. Walker Law Firm Judy Magness, Sue Strickland, \u0026amp; Katherine Mitchell, Deponents Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Horne, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  4 5 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY AGREEMENT OF COUNSEL. SWEARING OF THE WITNESS . . EXAMINATION OF MR. TONY ROSE By Mr. Walker. . SIGNATURE SHEET . . ERRATA SHEET . . COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION . . * * * * * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box Jl4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax PAGE . . 3 . . . . 3 ... . 3-24 . .      25 . .26 . 27  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 3 STIPULATIONS The deposition of Tony Rose, produced, sworn and examined at the Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark Law Firm, 400 West Capitol, Suite #2200, Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 commencing at 12:38 p.m., on October 5, 2001, in the captioned cause at the instance of counsel for the Plaintiff, and said deposition being taken according to the terms and provisions of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. It is stipulated and agreed all forms and formalities in the taking, transcribing, forwarding and filing of said deposition by witness, are hereby waived by the parties, the right being expressly reserved to object to the testimony of the witness at the time of trial as to incompetency, irrelevancy and immateriality, other than those with respect to the form of questions as propounded to the witness. * * * * * P R O C E E D I N G S THEREUPON, TONY ROSE having been called for examination by counsel for the plaintiff, and having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION Questions by Mr. Walker: Q. State your name. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box i4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. Tony Rose. Q. Mr. Rose were you informed that the school district had committed to the revised desegregation and education plan in January of 1988? A. I'm aware of the district committing to that plan. Q. You were not on the board at that time? A. I was not on the board at that time. 4 Q. I see. Were you aware that the plan calls for remediation of academic achievement of African-American students? A. My understanding is it calls for efforts to remediate the gap. Q. Well, look at 2.7. A. 2.7. REPORTER: Now, speak up a little bit for me, please. ROSE: Yes, ma'am. Q. 2.7 says it shall implement programs, policy, and procedures- -- A. Designed--- Q. designed to improve and remediate the achievement gap, the academic achievement of African-American students. A. Yes, sir. Q. Then 2.71 said that in order to do that you\"re going to have an annual assessment of the academic programs to determine the effectiveness of those programs in improving African-cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box H Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) . 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 American achievement. A. Yes, sir. CERTIFIED COPY Q. Have you ah, when did you go onto the board? A. A year and two weeks ago. 5 Q. I see. Have you seen an assessment--first of all, have you seen a litany or a listing of the academic programs in place when you came onto the board or during that year? A. A full list\nno, I don't believe I have. Q. I see. Do you agree that in order to make an assessment of a program the program has to have some kind of identity? A. It depends on the nature of the assessment. Q. well, if you\"re going to make an assessment as contemplated here, you have to know what the program is before you can determine the effectiveness of the academic program in improveing African-American achievement\nyou have to know what it is don't you? A. That's fair\nyes. Q. All right. Have you been given a listing of the programs which are in place, which were in place when you came on the board which had the purpose of improving African-American achievement? A. I understand that pursuant to the plan their are three programs. Q. What were those three? A. That's the National Science Foundation math and science Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box 14 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 6 program whatever it's called, the ah, early literacy, Pre-K literacy whatever it's called, and the middle school program. Q. What are the source of your understanding? A. The ah, report I believe\nthe compliance report. Q. Well now the plan is the plan, so I want you to--well, now that is a compliance--- A. Right. Q. I\"m saying here I would like to see where the plan says that there were three programs. A. I don\"t believe it does. Q. All right. Now are you saying that those were the only plans that you knew of which had the purpose of determining the effectiveness of--let me change it, change it. Are those the only programs which were in place that the board assessed in order to determine the effectiveness in improving AfricanAmerican achievement? A. Those were the programs that were apart of the program evaluation agenda as I understand it. The board approved program evaluation agenda. Q. Now this, this does not, 2.7 doesn\"t address or relate to the evaluation agenda. A. No. Q. It talks, it says here and I read it literally, \"it shall assess the academic programs implemented pursuant to 2.7 after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the Cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box *4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY programs in improving African-American achievement.\" A. It certainly says that, yes. 7 Q. All right. Are there any academic programs, programs which have been--which were implemented pursuant to 2.7 as of the time you came onto the board? A. The, my understanding has been that since the ah, desegregation orders were issued that the board has directed the district, the administrators have made their best efforts to comply to improve education level. Q. Well now Mr. Rose--- A. Did I misunderstand the question? Q. I don't mean to get or cross words with you--A. And I don\"t want to get cross words with you. Q. now I want to go through this. It says that Little Rock shall implement, 2.7 says that you shall implement the policies, programs, and procedures designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of African-American students. A. Yes, sir. Q. Are you saying--- FENDLAND: Including but not limited to Section 5 of the revised plan. WALKER: That's right. Q. Now are you saying that to your knowledge the only programs that have that purpose were the National Science Foundation Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box 14 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone 1 ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 8 grant, the early literacy program, and the middle school program? A. No, sir\nI'm not saying that. Q. Right. Now my question then is can you identify the other programs which were placed into effect by the school board which had the purpose of complying with 2.7 or its subordinate sections? A. No, I can\"t identify those those programs. Q. All right. Now if you can\"t identify a thing and you say you had it, that means you can\"t assess it doesn't it? A. Correct. Q. All right. FENDLAND: Are you meaning the board still? WALKER: I\"m meaning the board. ROSE: Board meaning the district because the board doesn't do the assessment. WALKER: Fine. Q. But you understand--now you are aware and I don't want to, I mean you are aware when you went on the board early on you were disappointed with the evaluation or assessment system in place\nis that fair to say as a board? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you all didn't approve the assessments that had been or evaluations that had been submitted? A. I believe if my recollection is correct and it may be hazy Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box f4 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 9 on this because I did attend several board meetings before I was actually sworn on the--- Q. Right. A. board, so which board meeting? Q. Well, whichever--- A. I believe in August before I came on the board is when the National Science Foundation evaluation was not approved. Q. All right. And since that ti--- A. Tabled actually. Q. All right. And since that time it has not been approved has it? The evaluation. A. I do not believe that it has. Q. In fact, since that time no evaluation has been approved by the board has it? No written evaluation has been approved by the board? A. We have received assessment reports that we have accepted on several programs. Q. But now an evaluation report is different from an assessment isn't it? A. Probably. Q. Now you are aware that the Evaluation Department has to abide by progressional standards in performing evaluations are you not? A. I would assume so. Q. That's why you have a P-R-E department. Cobb Court -Reporting P. o. Box *4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 10 A. Yes. Q. And you would also agree that when people do their own assessments of what they are doing they have in effect a conflict of interest? A. I would agree that that is a possibility. Q. All right. So that if you come to me and ask me how my program is working, I have a self-serving interest in saying to you that my program is working okay if that\"s an assessment? A. It's entirely possible that you could say that\nyes. Q. All right. Now but as a board you would want to at least have an evaluation that has purpose, content, criteria, conclusions and you all at least have adopted a set of evaluation guidelines haven\"t you? FENDLAND: Let me say that\"s a compound question. You went through the criteria and then ask him if he'd adopted it. Q. Right. You all have adopted a set of evaluation criteria haven't you? A. Yes. Q. I see. And just a verbal assessment does not meet the evaluation model does it? A. That's correct. Q. All right. Now have you ever seen any assessment of any program from the prospective of whether that program would or likely would not improve African-American achievement in this Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box #4 sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) . 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY district\nanything in writing? A. Yes. Q. You\"ve seen some. Can you identify it, please? A. The National Science Foundation assessment. Q. Now the National Science Foundation assessment but that wasn't approved by the board was it? A. The original one was tabled by the board. Q. And there has not been one approved since then has it? A. I don't believe it has\nno. 11 Q. Now that National Science Foundation grant was intended to apply at the southwest school, McClellan\nis that correct? A. Ah, I'm not sure. Q. What schools were included within the ambit of the National Science Foundation grant? A. I do not remember the original parameter\nthat was before I came onto the board. I know that the programs that have been developed using that grant money have been put in places, a great many schools. Q. I see. Now are you saying that that, the purpose of that was to improve African-American achievement? A. Yes, sir. Q. Is it fair, I mean have you read the grant proposal? A. I don't recall. Q. Have the heard the criticism that the grant proposal did in fact have that as one of its primary purposes but that is no Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 12 longer the primary purpose of the NSF grant\nare you aware of that criticism? Are you aware of that being a criticism? A. Are you making that criticism now? Q. I've made it before. A. Well, if you're making it now then I'm aware of it now. That's the first I've--- Q. But before now you have not? A. No, sir. Q. I see. Now if you're going to, if the program is for the purpose of improving African-American achievement that's different than improving achievement of all students isn't it? A. No, sir. Impr oving the achievement of all students will improve t he achievement of African-American students by definition. Q. Well let me, let me, let me see how that works. If you have white students at the 60 percentile level and black students at the 30 percentile level and they all go up as some figures show they did by say 5 percent--- A. Then they've all improved. Q. but this is not eliminating the disparity gap is it Mr. Rose? A. No, if the gap remains the same it certainly hasn't improved. Q. All right. Now do you agree that the only measuring standard that is in effect that the district has approved is Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box H sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 13 the SAT test, the S-A-T? A. In what sense, I\"m sorry, repeat your question. Q. Are you familiar with the criteria for determining whether or not the gap has been narrowed or eliminated? A. I understand that there are several standardize test and when we receive reports of those scores they're always broken down by race. Q. Well, we\"re talking about the test themselves\nwhat are those test other than the S-A-T? A. There's the ACTAP. there's ah, there\"s the state benchmark exams, district benchmark exams. Q. Now you understood that when we went, when this case was resolved in 1989 there was no ACTAP or Benchmark? A. Yes, sir\nI understand that. Q. And we\"re looking at achieving ah, narrowing the achievement gap that you have to use a consistent standard over a period of years, is that fair? A. That\"s probably the best way to do it\nyes. Q. I see. Now did the board ever decide in a board meeting that it was going to use ACTAP for that purpose of measuring whether or not the gap had been changed or was that something that was just presented to you by Dr. Lesley in the last year or so since you've been on the board? A. I don\"t recall the board approving or disapproving of which standards, which exams are going to be used. Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY Q. Do you recall her coming to you once and telling you all that the achievement gap had been eliminated? A. No, sir. 14 Q. Now you had a Research committee doctor, I mean Mr. Rose, do you remember being on that Research Committee? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did that Research Committee--do you understand Mrs. Springer participated in it? A. Absolutely, that's where I met Mrs. Springer. Q. Did that Research Committee have any purpose? A. A charge from the board. Q. I see. A. A vague charge. Q. Vague. Now is that Research Committee still in place? A. As far as I know the committee had not been disbanded. Q. Do you recall ever seeing criticism of the Research Committee by Dr. Lesley? A. Yes, I believe I have. Q. Do you remember her stating that we need to get rid of this sucker? A. I remember you reading that in court. Q. Were you surprised at that? A. Surprised, no. Q. Why would you get rid of a Research Committee that the board approved--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. I wouldn't. Q. if the purpose--you wouldn\"t? Does the staff have the power by inaction of a committee to overrule the board? A. The authority or the power? Q. Power. A. Yes. Q. It has the power, okay. A. They have the power to do through inactivity to negate policy. 15 Q. That's right\nI see. So they negated the policy in this case by in effect not using or continuing to use the Research Committee after February of this year, isn't that fair to say? A. Restate the question. Q. You haven\"t been to a committee meeting of the Research Committee since February have you? A. I believe we met once in the summer. Q. Did Mrs. Springer get notice of it? A. I don't know. Q. Did you all do anything? A. We talked about how to continue the work of the committee, who would chair it in the interim until Dr. James selected a new chair. Q. Who was present at that meeting? A. Myself, Dr. Lease, Mr. Babbs, there were others. Perhaps the teacher representative whose name escapes me and--- cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 16 Q. But not the Joshua representative. A. No, I don't believe Mrs. Springer was there. Q. But now it couldn't have been the summer if Dr. Lease was there. A. Early summer--- Q. But she was gone before the summer wasn't she? She left in late April--- A. Is that right--- Q. early May isn't it? A. I thought i t, I thought she left in June. Q. She didn't leave until June? A. I thought she left in June. Q. I see. A. I could be mistaken about that or have the date of the meeting wrong for that sake. Q. Did you all keep minutes of that meeting? A. I did not, I don't know if any--- Q. Did anyone? A. I don't recall. Q. All right. Now can you explain why the Research Committee didn't meet between February and the summer other than because Dr. Lesley sai d we want to kill this sucker? A. I don't think that would have had anything to do with it. Q. I see. Well isn't that, didn't she say that the Research Commi ttee activities should be under her program area? Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box t4 sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 17 A. She didn't say it to me\nI don't, I haven't heard her say that. Q. I see. You take the position that the district needs to be focusing upon low performing students, is that right? FENDLAND: Who is you? A. Yeah. WALKER: You personally. A. Me personally? Q. Yes. A. Yes, I've taken that position. Q. And if you want to improve the academic achievement of low performing students would you not agree that you would develop different strategies for relating to them than you would for achieving, for improving the achievement of already high performing students? A. Certainly. Q. And would you not agree that in order for low performing students who are already in high school to be served best that you would have to relate to their foundational needs more seriously than you would the students who are already high performing, highly performing? A. More seriously, what do you mean by that? Q. Well, the students can't read and write. You want to make sure that they can at least do those things before they go into something else? Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box t4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone, (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. Certainly. Q. And you don't have to follow that same approach with already high performing students, isn\"t that correct? A. You don't have to follow the same approach with students who already read and write\ncorrect. 18 Q. All right. Now, so for all practical--you know that most of the students who are low performing are black? A. I know that most of the students are black and so it follows that most of the students who are low performing are black. Q. Well, you understand that most of the white student are upper income, are middle to upper income? A. I assume that to be true. Q. Well you can look at the census tracks can\"t you--A. Yes, sir. Q. and you can tell that? A. Yes, sir. Q. All right. And if you were to come up with a system which allowed segregation of students--if you just wanted to say we wanted these classes segregated, all you would have to do is just simply say all the students who were in a certain test score range would be over here [motioning with right hand] but the ones who are in another lower test score range would be over here [motioning with the left hand] and the result would be predictable wouldn't it Mr. Rose? Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72164- 0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 ( 501) 490-0.926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY A. I'm sorry, are we segregating them by race or by test score? Q. Well, if you wanted--A. I mean by location? 19 Q. if you wanted to do it by race and you know that the test score performance is likely to be a certain way, if you do it you know what the outcome is going to be. In other words if you say we want to use race, if we want to get a racial result but we have to have a nonracial explanation for it, remember now we want a racial result but you can't come out and say we trying, nobody in the district can come out and say we want a racial result, so in order to get a racial result you can look at those characteristics that are most common to the racial groupings and then adopt criteria for placement that most apply to those racial groups. A. I'm sorry Mr. Walker, I quit listening to the question when you implied that there were people in the district who wanted racial results. Q. Oh, you don't believe that? A. No, sir\nI do not. Q. Are you not aware of ah, teachers and administrators referring in some cases to students ah, in racial terms? A. I've never heard it. Q. You've never even heard that the--- A. I've never heard teachers refer to students in racial Cobb Court Reporting P. O. Box i4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY terms. Q. But you don\"t hear teachers, you've never heard those reports? A. I hear teacher a lot. Q. Are you in the schools very much? A. Yes, sir. Q. Why are you there? A. Many reasons. My wife is a teacher, my daughter is a student--- Q. Where does your wife teach? A. Chicot. Q. Who is the principal there? A. Jane Harkey. 20 Q. Okay. Now you don't suggest that you hear all the comments between teachers and students do you? A. Absolutely not\nnot for a moment would I suggest that. Q. All right. You\"re not aware of the teacher at Dunbar who said that he was tired of teaching these dumb ass niggers? A. No, sir. Q. All right. So you just don't believe that people still have racial motivation in 2001 do you? A. No, sir\nI believe that they do. Q. But you believe that nobody in this district does? A. I believe nobody is denying children an education because of their race. Cobb Court Reporting P . o . Box 1f4 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : (501) 490- 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 21 Q. Well, there are different ways to deny education. You can let all kids be in a classroom, you can let them all hold their hands up but only call on certain kids from time-to-time\nthat's one way of separating kids isn't it? A. Sure. Q. You can give some kids, give all kids homework but you can give some kids verbalized instruction one-on-one and then not give it to the others and there\"s no way that those students have to complain about it\nbut you don\"t believe that kind of thing happens do you? A. I don\"t have any examples of it. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen. Q. I see. A. Do you have example of it? Q. Oh, yeah. You can give students extra--A. Have you reported those to the board, sir? Q. Oh, yes\nwe have. A. To the board. Q. Well wait a minute. First of all you understand that our charge is not to report things to you? A. No, sir\nI understand that once a month you have a spot on my agenda that you\"ve never appeared for to report things to me. Q. Do you understand that the purpose that what we have been doing is making our reports to the responsible administrators, Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: ( 501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERT\\F\\ED COPY 22 have you not seen the answers to the interrogatories on all the letters and other correspondence that has gone to the--- A. No, sir\nI have not. Q. Are you not aware of the scores and scores of letters of complaints that we--- A. I am aware that you--- FENDLEY: I'll object to the form, that is not true. We don\"t have any indication of the example you just gave. Q. Mr. Washington testified in court, I don\"t know whether you were there--- A. I did not hear Mr. Washington\"s testimony. Q. Mr. Washington testified that he was aware of the example of the white teacher at Dunbar rushing in to the student lounge and said that I'm just tired of teaching these dumb ass niggers. Now you would expect us not to bring those things to the board would you not if we\"re trying to cooperate with the district and bring--and you would expect us to bring them to the attention of your responsible administrators? A. I would certainly hope that a situation like that would be brought very quickly to the attention of someone who can do something about it. Q. Do you have anything to indicate that we have not been doing that over the past three years? A. Do I have anything to indicate that you have not been Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box 14 Sweet Home , AR 72164 - 0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 23 submitting--no, sir\nI do not have anything to indicate that you have not been submitting those kinds of reports. Q. Have you not been told by Ms. Mitchell and Mr. Babbs that we regularly and frequently brought to their attentions items of discrepancy and racial treatment within the schools? A. I don\"t recall, I don't recall. Q. Or did you assume that because I wasn't coming to the board to talk that we were not bringing things to the attention of your administrators? A. That is my assumption\nyes. Q. Well now, you understood Mr. Rose and I told you once or twice that we were, the purpose that we saw this of the plan was to foist good will and good working relationships upon the parties and to try to work at the lowest possible level to have things resolved so that when they got to the board they would be really serious matters. A. That's reasonable but I take those sorts of racial slurs like you just described as a serious matter. Q. Why should we do that and tell me, not this is a question, why should we bring that to the attention of the board if we bring it to the attention of the administrators and they try to find a way to work it out? A. That's probably, you're probably correct. Q. And why should we put that in the public domain ah, other than to perhaps embarrass a particular_ teacher or characterize Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box *4 sweet Home, AR 72164-0004 Phone: (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  25 CERTIFIED COPY 24 teach misbehaviors in a way that is not helpful? Why should we try to do anything to put the teachers down? Did I not come before you and say that we were trying to shore up the district rather than to pull it down? A. Yes, you said that. 2001.] WALKER: All right. No more questions. FENDLEY: I have no questions. [The deposition ended at 1:03 p.m., Octobers, * * * * * Cobb Court Reporting P . O. Box H sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : ( 501) 490 - 9066 (501) 490-0926 - Fax 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ' 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 CERTIFIED COPY SIGNATURE PAGE I, TONY ROSE, hereby certify that the above and foregoing deposition is a full, true, correct and complete transcript ~/the proceeding [mark the appropriate box): 25 J\\? had at the time of the taking of my deposition. (OR) ( ) subject to the notations on the attached Errata Sheet made by me or at my direction. Date STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI ) ) ss. ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me, a and for the aforesaid county and state on this of cOcJl\u0026amp;lHA , 2001. Notary Public in /} c\n-/j..__ ~ - day ~ Cobb Court Reporting P . o. Box f4 Sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490 - 0066 (501) 490 - 0926 - Fax CERTIFIED COPY 26 - 1 ERRATA SHEET 2 3 (Upon completion, please sign and date this sheet below.) 4 5 Page Line Change: 6 , To: 7 Reason: 8 Page __ Line Change: 9 To: 10 Reason: 11 Page Line Change: 12 To: 13 Reason: 14 Page Line Change: 15 To: 16 Reason: 17 Page Line Change: 18 To: 19 Reason: 20 Page Line Change: 21 To: 22 Reason: 23 Page Line Change: 24 To: 25 Reason: 26 Page Line Change: 27 To: 28 Reason: 29 Page Line Change: 30 To: 31 Reason: 32 Page Line Change: 33 To: 34 Reason: 35 Page Line Change: 36 To: 37 Reason: 38 Page Line Change: 39 To: 40 Reason: 41 42 43 Page of 44 TONY ROSE Date Cobb Court Reporting P. o . Box 14 sweet Home , AR 72164-0004 Phone : (501) 490-0066 (501) 490-092! - Fax    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 CERTIFIED COPY 27 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. 429-84-1622 COUNTY OF PULASKI I, Gloria Y. Cobb, A Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public in and for the aforesaid County and state, do hereby certify that the witness, TONY ROSE, was duly sworn by me prior to the taking of testimony as to the truth of the matters attested to and contained therein\nthat the testimony of said witness was taken by me in stenomask and was thereafter reduced to typewritten form by me or under my direction and supervision\nthat the foregoing transcript is a true and accurate record of the testimony given to the best of my understanding and ability. I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this proceeding was taken\nand, further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, nor financially interested, or otherwise, in the outcome of this action\nand that I have no contact with the parties, attorneys, or persons with an interest in the action that affects or has a substantial tendency to affect impartiality, that requires me to relinquish control of an original deposition transcript or copies of the transcript before it is certified and delivered to the custodial attorney, or that requires me to provide any service not available to all parties to the act. My Commission Cobb Court Reporting P. o. Box #4 Sweet Home , AR 72 164-0004 ~hone : (501) 4 90-0066 (501) 490 - 09 26 - Fax\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eCobb Court Reporting\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1307","title":"Proceedings: ''Hearing''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["2001-10-02"],"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 School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Court records","School integration","Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Hearing''"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1307"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["221 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_291","title":"Compliance correspondence","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2001-10/2001-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational planning","School administrators","Walker, John W."],"dcterms_title":["Compliance correspondence"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/291"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["correspondence"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n1 RECEIVED OCT 2 2001 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RECEIVED ' OCT 2 2001 OffICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mark Pryor Attorney General STATE OF ARKANSAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Mark A. Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General Direct dial\n(501) 682-3643 Direct Facsimile: (501) 682-2591 E-mail: MarkH@ag-Slale ar.us October 1, 2001 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 374-4187 VIA FACSIMILE and U.S. MAIL LRSD V. PCSSD\nUSDC\n4:82CV866SWW Dear Mr. Walker: This is to confirm the receipt of your facsimile transmission of September 19, 2001. In that faxed letter, you requested that I contact you in writing if I wished to continue to receive copies of communications between LRSD and the Joshua Intervenors. In order for my clients to keep abreast of developments in this case, and in order to respond to the Court at a future point in time regarding what has transpired in this case, my client and I request that we continue receiving communications between the Joshua Intervenors and LRSD. By this, we do not mean to inconvenience your office staff or make undue demands upon your financial resources\ntherefore, if you would like to send us communications between LRSD and the Joshua Intervenors on a weekly or bi-weekly basis in order to reduce your cost, we would certainly be amenable to this arrangement, or others if you could suggest them. Further, Sammye Taylor of this office has withdrawn as counsel from this case. Therefore, would you please have your records reflect that all further correspondence and pleadings should be sent to me. 323 Center Street  Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-2591 Internet Website  http.7/v^'^Av.ag.state.ar.us/ 1 Page 2 Mr. Walker October 1,2001 Please give me a call if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter. Very truly yours, MARK A. HAGEMEIER Assistant Attorney General MH/ale cc: via U.S. Mail\nSam Jones Ann Borwn Marshall Richard Roachell Chirs Heller Stephen Jones iU/Ul/Ul X3:4X iD:ns, Hnn narsnaii hro:tlay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 2/2 Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHELH fRIDAY(lM2-IPM} WIUIAMH SUTTON. P.A BYRON U EISEMAN. JR . P A JOED BELL. P.A. JAMES A BUTTRY, P.A FREDERICK S URSERY. P.A OSCAR E DAVIS. JR . P.A JAMES C CLARK. JR. P.A THOMAS P LEGGETT. P,A JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A PAULB BENHAM III. P.A LARRY W BURKS. P A A WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR. P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A J PHILLIP MALCOM. P A JAMES M SIMPSON. P A JAMES M SAXTON. P A J SHEPHERC-RUSSELL III. P.A. DONALD H BACON. P A WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. BARRYE COPLIN. P.A RICHARD D TAYLOR. P.A JOSEPH B HURST. JR . P.A ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P A ROBERT S SHAFER. P A WILLIAM M GRIFFIN Ill. P A MICHAEL S MOORE. P A DIANES MACKEY. PA. Walter M ebeliii.p.a KEVIN A CRASS. P.A. WILLIAM A WADDELL. JR . P.A SCOTT J LANCASTER. PA M GAYLE CORLEY. P.A ROBERT B BEACH. JR. P A J LEE BROWN. P.A JAMES C. BAKER. JR . P.A HARRY h LIGHT.P A SCOTT H TUCKER. P.A GUY ALTON WADE. P.A PRICE C GARDNER. P.A. TONIA P JONES. P.A DAVID D WILSON. P.A ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP WWW fridflyfirm.con 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE, SUITE 103 FM 501-685-2147 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2898 FAX 870-762-2918 JEFFREYH MOORE. P.A DAVID M CRAP. P A CARLA GWNILS SPAINHOUP.. P.A JOHN C PENDLEY. JR . P.A JONANN ELIZABETH CONICLIO. P.A R CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P.A TONY L. WILCOX. P.A. PRAN C HICKMAN. P A BETTY J. DEMORY. P A LYNDA M JOHNSON. P A JAMES W SMITH. P.A CLIFFORD W PLUNKETT. P.A DANIEL L HERRINGTON. P A MARVIN L CHILDERS K COLEMAN WESTBROOK. JR ALLISON J CORNWELL ELLEN M OWENS JASONB HENDREN BRUCE B TIDWELL MICHAEL  KARNEY KELLY MUP.PKY MCQUEEN JOSEPH? MCKA7 alexahma a. IFRAH JAY T TAYLOR MARTIN A KASTEN BRYAN W DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN A BOWMAN TIMOTHY C EZELL T MICHELLE AT OR KAREN S HALBERT SARAHM COTTON PHILIP B MONTGOMERY KRISTEN S RIGGINS ALAN G BRYAN OF cetmstt B S CLARK WILLIAM L TERRY WILLIAM L PATTON. JR H T LARZELERE. P A JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A A.D MCALLISTER October 1,2001 JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. LITTLE ROCK TEL5\u0026lt;M-9T0-9329 FAX S01-244-4341 VTA FAX: 374-4187 Mr. John W. Walker Attomev at Law 1723 Broadway Little RocL .AR 72206 RE\nLRSD V. PCSSD Dear Mr. Walker: We would like to depose Joshua's LRSD class representative and the Joshua monitors identified in your response to Interrogatory No. 3 of our first set of discovery who monitored LRSD during the term of the Revised Plan. Please provide dates over the next two weeks when they can be presented for deposition. We would expect each deposition to last approximately one hour. We appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, John C. Fendley, Jr.RECEIVED RECEIVED OCT 2 2001 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING jw St: 51 OCT 2 znoi OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mark Pryor Attorney General STATE OF ARKANSAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL A4ark A. Hagemeier Assistant Attorney General Direct dial: (501) 682-3643 Direct Facsimile: (501) 682-2591 E-mail: MarkH@ag.state.ar.us October 1,2001 VIA FACSIMILE and U.S. MAIL John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 374-4187 Re: LRSD V. PCSSD\nUSDC\n4:82CV866SWW Dear Mr. Walker: This is to confirm the receipt of your facsimile transmission of September 19, 2001. In that faxed letter, you requested that I contact you in writing if I wished to continue to receive copies of communications between LRSD and the Joshua Intervenors. In order for my clients to keep abreast of developments in this case, and in order to respond to the Court at a future point in time regarding what has transpired in this case, my client and I request that we continue receiving communications between the Joshua Intervenors and LRSD. By this, we do not mean to inconvenience your office staff or make undue demands upon your financial resources\ntherefore, if you would like to send us communications between LRSD and the Joshua Intervenors on a weekly or bi-weekly basis in order to reduce your cost, we would certainly be amenable to this arrangement, or others if you could suggest them. Further, Sammye Taylor of this office has withdrawn as counsel from this case. Therefore, would you please have your records reflect that all further correspondence and pleadings should be sent to me. 323 Center Street  Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-2591 Internet Website  http://v'^'w.ag.state.ar.us/ Page 2 Mr. Walker October 1, 2001 Please give me a call if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter. Very truly yours, MARK. A. HAGEMEIER Assistant Attorney General MH/ale cc\nvia U.S. Mail: Sam Jones Ann Borwn Marshall Richard Roachell Chirs Heller Stephen Jones FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 7J201-34M TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501) 376-2147 CONFtDSffnAUTY NOTE: The Information in this facsimha transmittal Is lagaify orMleaad and coahilaprt^ irH^flMontY for tha use of the IndMthml or entity namedabtate. tf The rentier this messaoe is not the Intended recipient you are hereby noitited that any disimlnatlon, dIstrhMtion or copy of the transmittal Is sirtetiy prohibited. If you reca/va this transmittal In error, please Immediatafy notify us by telephone and mum the original trvismittal to us at the abwe address da the United States Postal Service. Thanh you. Date: Time: Page: 10/2/01 8:55:14 1 To: Fax #: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: LRSD V. PCSSD: Principals Documents Dear Mr. Walker: We are in receipt of your fax of October 1,2001, concerning your review of documents re quested from principals. We cannot agree to make those available today. Depending on when we do the depositions of Board members, we can begin producing the documents o n Friday going through next week. The process will be slow, however, because we will be required to review each file before your review to ensure there is no personally identifiable student information or personnel records the disclosure of which would constitute a cleariy unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The documents produced will not include e-mails or conespondence. Your request in this regard is over broad. If you want to see these, you will need to either narrow your request or agree to a protective onder. Please write or call and let us know when you would like to begin your review of document s. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax\n501-244-5341Office of Desegregation Monitoring ' United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Marshall, Federal Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 October 3, 2001 Mr. Clay Pendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Clay\nAttached is a copy of a fax I received from you while I was recently on vacation making preparations for my daughters September 30\" wedding. I am perplexed by not only the subject matter but the tone of your message to me. At no time have I asked to attend a meeting of the LRSDs Compliance Committee. Further, I do not recall a conversation with you about attending such a meeting. Your fax, which was addressed solely to me, is surely an error. Id appreciate an immediate explanation and correction, Clay. If others were blind-carboned on this correspondence, please inform them in writing of your correction as well, so no misinformation will stand. Thank you very much. Sincerely yours, - Ann S. Marshall Enc. Bl iu:ns. Mnn narsnaii *f'o\nClay Fendley Friday Law Fir Page 1/1 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LlABILm PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201J4M TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 CONFIOeffnAUTY NOTE: TTie inlornallon In Ms facsimile tnmsmitol Is teaaltv orMImd and If (he reader A' hereby notified that any dtslmlnatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittal Is strictly onMblted. If you iran^ltal Inaror, please Immediately notify us by telephone and return the oilginal transmitial to us at the above atiOnss via the Untteb States Postal Service. Thank you. Date: Time: Page: 9/27/01 14:31:04 1 To: Fax #: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: Compliance Committee Meeting This Will confirm our telephone conversation today concerning Fridays Compliance Comm ittee meeting. You stated that you were going to show-up so I could tell you that you are n ot invited and put you out. I stated that I could tell you right now that you are not invited. You stated that you intended to show-up anyway and planned to document it with a earner a. I'm sending you this fax to \"documenr that you are not invited to Compliance Committee meetings. We would respectfully request that you not disrupt our meeting tomorrow. We appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501 -370-3323 Direct Fax. 501-244-5341Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (IW-IRM) WILLIAM H. SUTTON, P.A BYRON M. EISEMAN, JR.. P.A. JOE D. BELL, P.A JAMES BUTTRY. P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY. P.A OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR.. P.A- JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P.A JOHN DEWEY WATSON, P.A PAUL B. BENHAM lU. P.A LARRY W. BURKS. P.A A WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR,, P.A JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL lU. P.A DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER, P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST. JR.. P.A ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, PA. ROBERT S. SHAFER. P.A WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN HI. PA. MICHAEL S. MOORE, P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL UI. P.A KEVIN A CRASS. P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.rridayfirm.com JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A. DAVID M. GRAF. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR. P.A. JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR-. P.A JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. IFRAH JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN KASTEN JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGUO, P.A. BRYAN W. URE WILUAM WADDELL, JJf... P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH, JR.. P.A J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C BAKER. JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. GUY ALTON WADE, P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER, P.A TONIA P. JONES. P.A. DAVID D. WILSON. P.A. 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WESrCAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE, SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72703-4811 TELEPHONE 501-895-2011 FAX 501-895-2147 R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A. GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P.A TONY L. WILCOX. P.A. FRAN C. HICKMAN, P.A. BETTY J. DEMORY. P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON, P-A JAMES W. SMITH. P.A CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT, P.A. DANIEL L. HERRINGTON. P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K. COLEMAN WESTBROOK, JR. ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL MICHAEL . KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN A. BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR Karen s. halbert SARAH M- COTTON PHILIP B. MONTGOMERY KJUSTBN S. RJGGINS ALAN G. BRYAN OFCOUNSEL B.S. CLARK WILUAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. AD. MCALUSTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2888 FAX 87O-7B2-2B18 September 28, 2001 JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-3323 FAX 501-244-5341 fendlayQftc.nat Hand Delivered Mr. John W. Walker Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 RECEIVED OCT I 200i OFFICE Or RECElVgg OCT I OFFICE Of RE: LRSD V. PCSSD Dear Mr. Walker: In response to your September 5, 2001, request to our office, we are enclosing the State Benchmark Exam results in the form they were provided to the LRSD Board. In response to this morning's request by Ms. Cooley, we are providing the agenda for this morning's Compliance Committee meeting along with my letter referred to in the agenda. Your fax concerning this morning's Compliance Committee meeting is incorrect in that you indicate that the Superintendent turned you away. As you were told this morning, the Superintendent is out of town today. We will review with him our decision to exclude you from the Compliance Committee meeting upon his return. Let me also repeat my offer made to Ms. Springer this morning\nI would be happy to meet with you on a weekly basis to discuss compliance issues. We are contacting Board members and LRSD personnel that yesterday you asked to depose. We will not be able to produce anybody for deposition on Monday. Three of the five Board members who have responded so far are not available on Tuesday. We are going to try to find a date in the next two weeks on which all of the Board members are available. Please let us know your availability over the next two weeks so we can get these depositions scheduled. .I'*'-Mr. John Walker September 18, 2001 Page? We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, cc: Dr. Kenneth James (w/o enclosure) Ms. Aim Marshall (w/o enclosure) a xusy uuOT f aye X/ X FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201J4M TELEPHONE (JOI) 276.2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 CONFtDENTWJTY NOTE: TTk informatton tn tMs facsimile transmittal is togalty ortviieaed anti confbiencial information intantiati only tor tha usa tha intiMiiual or entity namati above. E the reatiar of this message is not the irrtertoed recipiant. you are hereby notiftoti that arty disimtnation, Oistrfbutton or copy tjf the trvtsmitt^isstrtotiy prohibitea. if you recaNe this transmittal in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the United States Postal Service. Thank you. Date: Time: Page: 9/27/01 14:31:04 1 To: Fax #: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject\nMessage: Compliance Committee Meeting This will confirm our telephone conversation today concerning Friday's Compliance Comm ittee meeting. You stated that you were going to show-up so I could tell you that you are n ot invited and \"put you out.\" I stated that I could tell you right now that you are not invited. You stated that you intended to show-up anyway and planned to document it with a earner a. I'm sending you this fax to \"document\" that you are not invited to Compliance Committee meetings. We would respectfully request that you not disrupt our meeting tomorrow. We appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday. Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax: 501-244-5341( John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 HECSfVSD AUS IS office Of 2001 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, PA DONNA J. McHENEY Via Facsimile - 244-5344 August 14, 2001 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mcheiiryd@swbell.net Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Chris: I take your letter to be simply a rejection of my request that I be informed of meetings of the compliance committee and of all proposals before the compliance committee has had an opportunity to take a position on them. The rest of your letter is a set of self-serving statements with which I disagree. I will respond to several of them, however, as follows: First, I disagree with your premise. I also disagree that you added 8.3 to enable us to have a remedy in the event the District failed to develop the promised programs, policies, and procedures. I always expected to be and still expect to be involved before you all develop any new programs, policies or procedures that have anything to do with implementation of desegregation. I have never wavered from that position. That is different from monitoring with respect to compliance programs. One dealt with actual compliance and the other dealt with setting into place programs, policies and procedures that will help facilitate desegregation and reduce compliance problems in the first place. Second, you indicate that I agreed to be paid $150,000.00 for three years for monitoring. In doing so, you attempt to diminish me and beyond that you deprecate me as well by indicating that my principles are subject to purchase. I never agreed to accept $45,000-50,000 a year for monitoring. We agreed to a total settlement amount for past and future fees in the amount of $850,000.00 approximately. The $150,000.00 was simply deferred. Third, don t talk to me anymore about bad faith. You and Les Gamine totally mislead me from day one. You mislead the Court as well. You withheld data from ODM, Drs. Ross and Roberts and me. Because of that, the District is made to appear that it never had any intent to desegregate as promised. You and Clay Fendley appear to me to have schemed to evade and avoid compliance. Now, you try to make me the heavy for the poor state of compliance that you are in. Beyond that, you specifically kept me out of discussions regarding compliance and discussions with the State of Arkansas regarding loan forgiveness. The morning and night( Page 2 - Letter to Christopher Heller August 14, 2001 eating meetings which you and Les Camine had with me, of which there will be no more, were designed to placate and direct me away from the districts activities so that I would not be fully aware of the various nefarious efforts that you, Clay and Les Carnine were engineering. Fourth, you suggest that in three years we have not proposed a single program, policy or procedure by which to assist the district in meeting its obligations. This simply is wrong, but I need not address it. You now indicate that since trial I have barged into the oflaces of District administrators unannounced and uninvited and other things. You may say what you wish with respect to my activities. I do not agree, however. I notice that you have listed six people as receiving copies. Not one of those people will inform you that I have made a request that either of them verbally provide any information to me since the dont talk to Walker (letter) e-mail from you. My requests, many of which remain unanswered, have been in writing. If you think that I have breached the Judges order, specify your allegations stating the person, place, date and time and witnesses, if any. Otherwise, apologize. Fifth, you now indicate that is inappropriate for me to be personally involved in compliance committee meetings. That is a new position which is contrary to our agreement. Beyond that, it is more appropriate for me to be involved than for you and Clay because we represent the parties in quest of remedy. You both have been obstructionists and now you prevaricate. It is not enough for the policies, etc. to be presented to me at the time they are beinj presented to the Board! The idea was clear that we would work out and work through the programs, policies and procedures before they were presented to the Board in the first place. The fact that I did not appear before the Board is due to the fact that you and Les Camine materially mislead me about what was taking place in the District, withheld information and informed me of the many positive things that were happening, when in fact, they were not happening. Finally, it is evident that good faith was not in you or in the district. You mislead the Board, the community, the Court and me as well. This was the administration in action. Those administrators followed your lead! They sought to cover up, by use of slick language, noncompliance. Now your letter to me is another attempt to cloud reality and to deflect attention from the poor judgment which you and Clay made in letting this District go forward in this court proceeding at this time. You agreed that Little Rock was not ready for unitary status with the caveat that Little Rock was better than other districts and that the covenant should protect the interests of my clients. I did not agree and I told you that in January, February, March. April. May and June when I proposed to you that we delay your motion and then meet regularly, with defined obiectives. to address the problems which needed to be worked out to effectively deliver educational opportunity to black children. Instead, you deliberately chose to put me into the position of having to file objections. You made a money proposal which reflected that you thought you could buy me. You clearly dont know me! My proposal was never about money for myself. Rather, it was to address the issue with the State differently and to seek further benefits from the State that would benefit Black children rather than all children. When you say all, it is now clear that you mean non-Black children. Sure, I want adequate compensation forI Page 3 - Letter to Christopher Heller August 14, 2001 my work. You receive it and there is no public issue or discussion about it and there is no limit on your charges. 1 have readily met with you, Les Carnine and other district staff people when called upon, provided I received adequate notice, and have sought to be involved on a continual basis with the Districts purported compliance efforts. I have employed at least three people who regularly engaged in monitoring activities. That reflects good faith on our part. Your ofBce, on the other hand, has lead the District into a more racially segregated posture than it was three years ago and with all of that, you try to shift the blame onto me. Shame on you, Heller. You are supposed to be a man, not less. Your conduct, advice, actions, and crying are traditional and typical. I need say no more. Check your own fees, however, and see who benefits from continuing this case! Inasmuch as you have seen fit to copy your associate superintendents and Dr. James, in your effort to put me in my place, they are being copied with this letter as is the ODM. The question yet remains about meeting the needs of Black children. For Black children, is there no balm in [the Little Rock School District] ? Is there no physician [here]? Apparently, not. We war when we promised to make peace and to educate Black children. It cannot end until justice is delivered to those children. Sincerely, A / -\u0026lt;rohn W. Walker JWW:js cc. Dr. Ken James Ms. Ann Marshall Ms. Sadie Mitchell Mr. Junious Babbs Dr. Don Stewart Mr Brady GadberryFriday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1922-1994) WILUAM H. SUTTON. P.A. ^YRON M. EISEMAN. JR. P.A. JOE D. BELL, P.A. JAMES BUTTRY. P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK, JR., P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM lU. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR., P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON, P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON, P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL UI. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILUAM THOMAS BAXTER, P.A. BARRY B. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST. JR.. P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, P.A. ROBERT S. SHAPER. P.A. WILUAM M. GRIFFIN UI. P.A. MICHAEL $. MOORE. P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL HI. P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.fridayfirm.com 2000 REGIONS CENTER KEVIN CRASS. P- 400 WEST CAPITOL WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR. P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH, JR. P.A. I. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER JR. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT, P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER P.A. GUY ALTON WADE. P.A. PRICE C GARDNER P.A. TONIA P. JONES. P.A. DAVID D. WILSON. P.A. LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 237 EAST MILLSAP, SUITE 7 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72703 TELEPHONE 501-895-2011 FAX 501-695-2147 JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A. DAVID M. GRAF. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR. P.A. JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR.. P.A. JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGLIO, P.A. R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A. GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P.A. TONY L. WILCOX. P.A. PRAN C. HICKMAN. P.A. BETTY J. DEMORY. P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON. P.A. JAMES W. SMITH. P.A. CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT. P.A. DANIEL L. HERRINGTON. P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K COLEMAN WESTBROOK. JR. ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL MICHAEL E. KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. JAY T. TAYLOR IFRAH MARTIN A. KASTEN BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KAREN S. HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON OF COUNSEL B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. A.D. MCALLISTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2896 FAX 870-762-2918 received August 9, 2001 AUG 1 5 2C0I CHRISTOPHER HELLER LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-1506 FAX 501-244-5344 baUrfc.n9t Mr. John Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 OFFICE OF desegregation MONITOfljNG gB0VS RE: LRSD V. PCSSD AUG 1 3 2001 Dear John: 1/ This letter is in response to your letter of August 2, 2001, to Dr. James requesting that you be informed of future meetings of the Comphance Committee and all proposals that relate to desegregation comphance before the Comphance Committee or the cabinet has an opportunity to take a position on them. This will also acknowledge and respond to your verbal request to attend Comphance Committee and other meetings. For the reasons set forth below, we cannot accommodate your requests. First, the Revised Plan imposes no obligation on the District to involve you in the development of programs, pohcies and procedures. During negotiations leading up to the Revised Plan, you stated that you wanted a remedy available to you should the District fail to develop the promised programs, pohcies and procedures. As a result, we agreed to add Section 8.3 of the Revised Plan. Section 8.3 provides: Comphance issues subject to enforcement in accordance with Section 8.2 shall include LRSD's implementation of the program, policies and/or procedures developed in accordance with this Revised Plan. Before the end of the transition period, LRSD shall develop and/or identify the programs, pohcies and/or procedures to be implemented in accordance with this Revised Plan and provide the to Joshua. Joshua shall have [the] right to invoke the process described in Section 8.2 if LRSD fails to adopt programs, pohcies and/or procedures required by this Revised Plan\nadopts facially deficient programs, pohcies and/or procedures\nor, fails to implementMr. John Walker August 9, 2001 Page 2 the programs, policies and/or procedures adopted in accordance with the Revised Plan.II As Section 8.3 makes clear, it was never contemplated that you would be involved in the development or identification of the programs, pohcies and procedures required by the Revised Plan. Rather, the District agreed in advance to pay you for monitoring so that you could put the District on notice of any comphance problems. You agreed that you would invoke Section 8.2 as soon as you discovered any compliance problems. The District retied upon that agreement in implementing the programs, policies and procedures outlined in the Compliance Plan and the Interim Compliance Report. Your objection to the District being declared unitary after not having invoked Section 8.2 smacks of bad faith o Sumlarly, we have no reason to believe that the purpose of your request is to work with the District in a positive, constructive manner. In three years, you have not proposed a .single program, policy or procedure. Yourrecent conduct suggests a different motive for your request. Among other things, you have barged into the offices of District admimstrators unannounced and uninvited, have threatened to embarrass\" District admimstrators, have denied receiving documents that were provided to you and have communicated with District administrators without our consent, even after Judge Wright specifically ordered you not to do so. We can only conclude that this request is being made to afford you a greater opportunity to engage in last minute discovery and to attempt to harass and intimidate District personnel. Finally, as the attorney for Joshua, we do not believe it is appropriate for you to be personally involved in meetings and policy discussions at the level requested. Every new pohcy adopted by the Board has been provided to you before being adopted, and you are on the agenda for every Board meeting. That was and is your forum to discuss policy. The fact that you rarely appeared at Board meetings over that last three years further suggests you have acted in bad faith. Moreover, most, if not all, committees within the District include a Joshua class member, even if not a representative assigned by you. The District has worked at good faith for three years to implement the Revised Plan without any significant input fi-om you, even after the Interim Compliance Report was filed. Please be assured that we will continue to do so even though we decline the request set forth in your letter of August 2. Sincerely, Christopher Heller CJH\nlkh Mr. John Walker August 9,2001 Page 3 cc: Dr. Kenneth James Ms. Ann Marshall Ms. Sadie Mitchell Mr. Junious Babbs Dr. Don Stewart Dr. Brady Gadberry10/04/01 11:20 To:Honorable Susan Webber Wright FronrClay Fendley Friday Law Firn Page 1/1 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONT (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501) 376-2147 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information in this facsimile transmittal is legally orivileoed and confidential information Intended only for the use of the individual or entity nanyed above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disimlnatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittal Is strictly prohibited. If you receive this transmittal In error, please Immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the United States Postal Service. Thank you. Date\nTime\nPage\nTo\nFax#\n10/4/01 11\n26\n54 1 Honorable Susan Webber Wright 6045169 From\nClay Fendley Subject\nMessage\nPlaintiffs Motion for Contempt Dear Judge Wright\nIn light of your Order entered yesterday and Joshua's representation that it would comply with the Court's decision, we believe our pending Motion for Contempt is moot and hereby withdraw the motion. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely. Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol. Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail\nfendley@fec.net Direct Phone\n501-370-3323 Direct Fax\n501-244-5341lo:Ms. Ann Marshall FroB:Cldy Fendley Friday Law Firs Page 1/1 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201^493 TELEPHONE (SOI) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 C0NFX3EHTWJTYNOTE: The Infonnatlon In this f^nUk transmittal Is leaally luMImd and confidential Monratlon Intended gnl]^ Idr the use of the Individual ar entity named above. If the reader of this message Is not the Intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disiminatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittal Is strictly prohibited. If you receive this transmittal In error, please Immediately notlly us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us al the above address via the United Stales Postal Service. Thank you. Date: Time: Page: 10/4/01 11:20:04 1 To: Fax#: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: LRSD V. PCSSD - Motion for Contempt and Depositions Dear Mr. Walker: In light of the Judge's Order entered late yesterday afternoon and representation to the Co urt that will comply with her ruling, we will be withdrawing our pending Motion for Contemp t. This renders the depositions scheduled for this afternoon moot, and we have advised th ose involved that they need not appear. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax: 501-244-5341/C -f-e! JOHN W WAl.tn7.P SHAWN CHILDS JOHN w. Walker, P.A. ArroBNEYArLAW 1723 BKOAUwiy Rock, Arkansas 72206 TKI^HONE (601) 374.3758 PAX (601) 374-4187 Via Fax: 376-2147 kobehtiS^IS DONNaJ.McHZNTO Road Email nicheaiydswbaILaet Nir. Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Mr. Fendley: Please have the pe^o^el files f*e deposed today w.th the witnesses If you have obj ection to this, please let with Judge Wright. me know so that I can take the matter up this morning Thank you for your attention to this matter. ^iccfoly. Joi Walker JVvHA^lp cc: Ms. Arm Marshall10/08/01^ 15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall FroB:Clay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 2/5 AGREEMENT FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER This Agreement arises out the Little Rock School District Desegregation case, U.S.D.C. No. LR-C-82-866. Hereinafter, \"LRSD\" shall refer to the Little Rock School District and \"Joshua\" shall refer to the Joshua Intervenors, attorney John Walker and any agents or employees of the Joshua Intervenors or attorney John Walker. LRSD and Joshua will be collectively referred to as the \"parties. IT IS HEREBY AGREED: II 1. LRSD shall make available for review correspondence, e-mails and other documents obtained from LRSD principals for the purpose of responding to Joshua's August 13, 2001, discovery request. It is understood that the documents to be provided may include student information and personnel information which the LRSD considers confidential. Accordingly, the parties agree that all correspondence, e-mails and other documents provided to Joshua in response to Joshua's August 13, 2001, discover}' request shall be considered Confidential Discovery Material and shall be used only for the purposes of the Little Rock School District desegregation case (including any appeals) and not for any other purpose whatsoever. Confidential Discover}- Material shall not be gu'en, shown, made available, or communicated in any wuy to anyone except those persons to whom it is necessary for purposes of the Little Rock School District desegregation case. 2. (a) C onfidential Discovery Material may not be disclosed to any person other than: Counsel of record of the parties to this litigation\nPage 1 of 4 I10/08/01^15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall Froffi:Clay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 3/5 (b) Paralegal, clerical, and other such personnel employed or retained by, or working under the supervision of, counsel of record of the parties to this litigation. (C) Consultants or expert witnesses (as defined in Fed. R. Civ, P. 26(b)) engaged by counsel of Joshua\n(d) The Court and court personnel\nand (e) An other person or entity as to whom counsel for LRSD agrees in A\\Titmg, or whom the Court directs shall have access to such infonmatinn Counsel for Joshua may disclose Confidential Discovery' Material to the class representative only to the extent that disclosure is necessary in order for counsel for Joshua to understand the meaning or context of the Confidential Discovery Material and only after counsel for Joshua has made a good faith attempt to understand the document without assistance from the class representative. Counsel for Joshua shall provide LRSD's counsel with wTitten notice identifying documents which have been disclosed to the class representative within ten (10) days of disclosure. 3. All persons to whom Confidential Discovery Material is disclosed or by whom Confidential Discovery Material is used, shall be informed of and agree to be bound by the terms of this Agreement and shall take all necessaiy' precautions to prevent any disclosure or use of Confidential Discovery' Material other than as authorized by this Agreement and shall agree to submit to the personal jurisdiction of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, on any issue relating to compliance with the Agreement. Counsel subject to this Agreement shall take all reasonable steps necessary to advise any person to whom Confidential Discovery Page 2 of 410/08/01 15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall FrorarClay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 4/5 Material may be disclosed, or by whom it may be used, of the terms of this Agreement and, in addition, before disclosure of any Confidential Discovery Material, shall obtain from any person described in subparagraphs 2(b), 2(c), and 2(d) herein a wntten affidavit of acknowledgment that such person has reviewed a copy of this Agreement and will comply with its terms in all respects. Such original signed affidavits shall be retained by counsel of record and a copy provided to opposing counsel within seven (7) days of execution. 4. If Joshua wants to use Confidential Discover}' Material for a purpose other than the Little Rock School District desegregation case, the Confidential Discover} Material at issue shall be treated as Confidential Discover}^ Material until LRSD agrees in writing that the information and/or documents may be used for another purpose or the United State District Court presiding over the Little Rock School District desegregation case issues an order authorizing Joshua to use the information and/or documents for another purpose. 5. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent Joshua from producing any document or intormation in his, her, or its possession in response to a lawful subpoena or other compulsory process\nprovided that notice shall be given to LRSD at least fourteen (14) business days prior to the return date of the subpoena or other compulsory process, or, if the subpoena or other compulsory process has a return date of less than fourteen (14) days, notice shall be given to LRSD in writing or by telephone as soon as possible but in no event later than forty eight (48) hours prior to the return date. Page 3 of 410/08/01 15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall From.Clay Fendley Friday Law Firm Page 5/5 6. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed as a waiver by LRSD of any privilege, a waiver of its right to object to production of information or documents on the basis that said information is not subject to discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or of its right to object to the introduction of information or documents into evidence. 7. Within ninety (90) days after the conclusion of hearings on Joshua's objection to LRSD being released from Court supervision, all Confidential Discovery Material and documents containing or reflecting information designated as Confidential Discovery Material, including but not limited to copies, summaries and excerpts, shall be returned to LRSD or at the option of LRSD all such Confidential Discover}' Material shall be certified as having been destroyed, provided that counsel may retain their work product, copies of court filings and official transcripts and exhibits, provided that the Confidential Discovery Material contained therein will continue to be treated as provided herein. 8. This Agreement be effective immediately upon execution by the parties and shall survive the conclusion of this litigation. 9. The parties agree to file a joint motion for cntr\\' of a protective order consistent with the terms of this Agreement. John C. Fendley, Jr. Attorney for LRSD John W. Walker Attorney for Joshua DATED\nDATED: Page 4 of 410/08/01 15:04 To:Ms. Ann Marshall FroiB:Clay Fendley Friday Law Fir Page 1/5 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LBUTED LIABILm PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW lOOO REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. .ARKANSAS \"MOl-JAM TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 CONFIDEKTtMJTY NOTE: The information in Ms facsimile transmittal Is legally anvileoed anti conMemlal Information intendeitonly lor the use of the Indhndual or entity nameOabaie. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby nolifled that any disiminatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittai Is strlctty prohibited. If you receive this transmittal in error, please Immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the United States Postal Service. Thanh you. Date: Time: Pages: 10/8/01 15:03:42 5 To: Fax #: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: E-mails Dear Mr. Walker: We have ready for your review the e-mails of principals through March 15, 2001. There ar e a total of 5454 e-mails. We will make them available for your review on a computer in ou r office. Please call and let me know when you want to begin reviewing the e-mails. I am attaching the Agreement for Protective Order which you agreed to sign at the Octobe r 2, 2001, hearing. Please bring the signed agreement with you when you come to review the e-mails. We appreciate your cooperation. Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: f6ndley@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax: 501-244-5341I I xua y taw I XI (It raye j./i FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNEliSIIir ATTORxNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS \"2201-3493 TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (501)376-2147 CONFIDEHTIAUTY NOTE: The information in this facsimile transmittal is legally orivileoed and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message Is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disimlnatlon, distribution or copy of the transmittal is strictly prohibited. If you receive this transmittal in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the United States Postal Service. Thank you. Bate: T ime: Page: 10/09/01 14:49 1 To: Fax: Ms. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject:FOIA of Board Minutes Message: Dear Mr. Walker: We have complete set of Board minutes in our office which we can make available for you review at your convenience. a Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Little E-mail: Direct Direct Capitol, Suite 2000 Rock, AR 72201 f endley@f ec.net Phone: Fax: 501-370-3323 501-244-53410,1 '* 71/|eZX.j 1 ) John w. Walker, P.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Via Facsimile - 324-2146 October 16, 2001 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, PA. donna J. McHenry 8210 Hendbkson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (601) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mcheiiryd^wbell.net Dr. T. Kenneth James Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RECEIVED OCT i 9 2001 Dear Dr. James: QfflCtOf DEsestEOAnoiiiytofii^ I am in receipt ofDr. Linda Watsons letter dated October S  her 11 onm j\n-.,  T,- , 5, 2001 m response to mine of compliance issues at Rightsell and Stephens schools In that we we are requestmg that this matter be referred to the ODM as September 11, 2001 regardinj'g are not satisfied with the response, provided by the plan. Please let me hear from your by return mail Sinperely, John W. Walker JWW:js Enclosures cc: Dr. Linda Watson Mr. Junious Babbs Ms. Ann Marshall Mr. Clay Fendley John w. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501). 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Corrected Copy Via Facsimile - 324-2146 September 11, 2001 OF counsel ROBERT McHENRY, PA. DONNA J. McHENEY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenrydl^wbelLnet Dr. Kenneth James Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. James: new This is to advise that I attended a conference and made a monitoring visit today at the Stephens School where Ms. Sharon Brooks is the principal. I am once again disturbed about my findings regarding Ms. Brooks treatment of black boys. Ms. Sadie Mitchell and Ms. Frances Cawthon Jones should recall that I contacted them after school started last year to bring to their attention complaints that I had received regarding Ms. Brooks treatment of black boys at Rightsell Elementary. She effectively suspended the boys in Ms. Irbys first grade class for more than two months when she separated the boys from the girls and placed them with Ms. Tims and Mr. Harris who were not certified teachers. During a conference today, I learned that Ms. Brooks gave a four year old black male student a ten day suspension for the offense of a false alarm. Her punishment of this child was harsher than the punishment recommended for students in grades K-5 for the same offense. Ms. Brooks provided the parent with her right to appeal, however, she attempted to renege on the parents right to appeal by not allowing the child to remain in school. Ms. Brooks provided the parent with a suspension notice that indicated the child remain in school upon appeal. Rather than allow him to continue his regular educational opportunities as provided by the appeals procedure, Ms. Brooks placed the student in in-school suspension pending further appeal. We believe her actions are not only retaliatory, but they also violate the revised plan. We are, therefore, invoking the process with respect to Ms. Brooks treatment of black boys while at Rightsell and her current actions at Stephens citing Sections 2.1\n2.5\n2.5.1\n2.5.4\n2.8, 2.12, 2.12.2, and 2.13 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. The names of the parents and students at Right sell may be obtained from the classroom roll of Ms. Irby and their PEFs and the names of the parties involved at Stephens are identified in a letter written by Ms. Springer to Dr. Watson on yesterday, September 10, 2001.Thank you for your attention to this request. icereJ 1 i^ictated but not read John W. Walker JWW:js co: Ms. Ann Marshall  Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Junious Babbs Ms. Sadie Mitchell Ms. Frances Cawthon Jones St 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 __________ Phone: (501)324-2170 E-mail: lwatson@alc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us LINDA WATSON, Ed. D. ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT __________ STUDENT DISCIPLINE Fax: (501) 324-0536 October 5,2001 John W, Walker, P. A. Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Dear Mr. Walker: -- - XT I 1 2001 1/ I am writing to respond to your letter dated September 11, 2001. I forwarded a letter to Mrs. Springer, dated September 15, 2001, which stated that the situation with the four-year old student had been resolved since the students 10-day suspension'was modified to a two-day suspension. Stephens 2000 2001 and Rightsells 1999  2000 annual discipline numbers were reviewed before the beginning of this school year. Mrs. Brooks has addressed discipline in her school unprovement plan and will be working towards decreasing the number of suspensions. We are aware that starting a new program is sometimes difficult when students are adjusting to a new administration and different expectations. Please note that Rightsell.s suspensions dropped once, the expectations for student behaviors had been established and implemented. Also, Rightsells academics and test scores improved greatly once the students were aware of the expectations. We believe the same will happen at Stephens. If you have further questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Dr. Linda Watson C\nDr. Ken James, Superintendent Jumous Babbs, Associate Superintendent Attorney Clay Fendley John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Via Fax: 376-2147 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY. P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  F.ax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd@swbeU.net October 16,2001 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, .Arkansas 72201 Dear Mr. Heller: Please find enclosed our listing of witnesses, the subject areas of their testimony and our exhibits. I have previously informed the Court that at this next proceeding I am not inclined to call any additional witnesses on the two primary issues before the Court at this point, i.e., evaluations and discipline. They both, however, relate to the issue of remediation of achievement disparities of Afidcan American students. Please be advised that I will be asking the Court for rebuttal time to your case in an amount which is sufficient to address issues that you may seek to interject for the first time. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sipcerely, W. 5^er JWW:lp Enclosures cc: Honorable Susan Webber Wright All Counsel Ms. .Ann Marshall IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V, NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. LET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS 1. JOSHUA INTERVENORS SUPPLEMENTAL WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LISTS I Witness List The Joshua Intervenors respectfully give notice to the school district that it will possibly call the following witnesses: 1) school board members Berkley, Mitchell, Magness, Strickland and Rose (depositions have been taken)\nDr. Daughtery, Mr. Kurrus and Ms. Magness are on record with their tape recorded statements before the school board\n2) the ODM Monitors (Ms. Marshall, Mr. Jones, Ms. Powell) will discuss their reports and findings and will share opinions which have been professionally formed\n3) Mr. Ray Simon, State Superintendent of Education (Mr. Simon will address the manner in which the State was persuaded to abandon a key provision of the Settlement Agreement by LRSD officials and state political leaders)\n4) Dr. Terrence Roberts and Dr. Steve Ross (will discuss their involvement or5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) noninvolvement in development of policies, programs and procedures, evaluations and remediation of achievement disparities)\nMs. Estelle Mathis, former Associate and Acting Superintendent of Schools, LRSD, will address the district's commitment to use and the actual use and results of national standardized tests in evaluating remediation of student achievement disparities\nthe school principal of each school in the LRSD (by agreement Joshua will limit the numbers of principals who may be presented to the Court). These principals will be called for sure: Mr. Howard, Central\nMr. Smith, Hall\nMr. Carter, McClellan\nMs. Brooks, Stephens, Ms. Cox, Baseline\nMr. Mosby, Southwest\nMr. Saine, ALC\nMr. Oliver, Watson\nand several vice principals from Hall, notably Mr. Wade and Mr. Moore. These principals will address remediation and discipline. district administrators Gadberry, Briggs, Frances Jones, Ed Williams and Everett Hawks will address programs, facilities and evaluations\nDr. John Flxiker, will provide an analyst of data over time which addresses the issues raised in the ODM reports, the State Department of Education reports and the district's own reports regarding the effects of remediation. Dr. John Nuimery and Ms. Kay Rainey, persons identified by Dr. Bonnie Lesley as Program Evaluators, will address program evaluations\nparents Donna Stone, Marion Humphrey, Pam Mercer and Deodis Fleming and teachers, Michael Faucett and LaVanna Wilson and Nona Whitaker will address discipline and remediation according to their personal knowledge.Exhibit List The Joshua Intervenors do not anticipate introducing any additional exhibits except school board minutes and recorded statements by school board members Magness, Strickland, Kurrus and Daughtery. Joshua reserve the right to supplement the exhibit list before trial after reviewing the emails of the district which have not been completed by undersigned counsel. Joshua also reaffirms that it will rely upon ODM reports, which are already before the Court, regarding discipline and student achievement. Respectfully submitted. . JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 (Tel.) (501) 374-4187 (Fax) , ( By: Joh /, : Walker, Bar No. 64046 Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 (781) 862-1955CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed, postage prepaid to the following counsel or record, postage prepaid on this /^^ay of November, 2001. Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock. .AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Marshall ODM One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, .Arkansas 72201 I Mr. Mark Hagemeier Office of .Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock. .AR 72201 / Jo\nW.Walker iDins. ttnn ndrsnaix rromzLiay rendley Friday Law Firm Fage 1/1 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK A L1^U^ ED HABILI l Y PARTNEHSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 REGIONS CENTER 4fl WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE (501) 376-2011 FAX NO. (.\"101) SltllAT CONFiDENTiAUTY NOTE: The informatktn in (his facsimiie transmittal is legaiiy otiviietted and conOdendai information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disimination. distribution or copy of the transmittai is strictly prohibited, if you receive this transmittal in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original transmittal to us at the above address via the Urrited States Postal Service. Thanh you. Date: Time: Page: 10/24/01 14:46:50 1 To\nFax#\nMs. Ann Marshall 3710100 From: Clay Fendley Subject: Message: LRSD V. PCSSD Dear Mr. Walker\nPlease advise on what dates next week the Joshua class representative can be made avail able for deposition. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Clay Fendley Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: fendlGy@fec.net Direct Phone: 501-370-3323 Direct Fax: 501-244-5341(Kev, 1/aO)  kKSn EXHIBITS jjections Identification date 6/ No. Rulings Pc. ss C\\ VS. description .^ffer/Rec'dyJfl ' C.JC au U5 Cf. bbb cyl 44g - C)(l cyl (,no I I Ofl b,'ii Cxi 45^ ex i 6 CxI C.^'S CK. U'}L, I Icy ^TT , a Uig I Cl (a'19 g g 1^2 I I LXSD E. S kRSP EterKCri) u I* uRsn IRSO  Li u\n\u0026lt; I  I Ut^SP f, It It causeno7~^ ^vtseJ Jill Iiii-2xk3o Xooa LRso hvxUl^ Lt^so ll n It It l 5-Oo ^C-lnfld/s - P^'me.i pals' I t^s4-t j-U-t-Ct $gto.. n-3t-\u0026lt;5e kKSO iXeywQ It, U-s-T? Pr-.Adu C\u0026gt;ue P, ^\u0026lt;x:gs^ A-vf ftssk Phtt^ttp\u0026lt;| Die.PrdgSg T\" 15-1? 4- S ii^^cats^LBacduLs_6:\u0026lt;M4filL!ifi\u0026lt;i. EPfeeVive.. Disctpkkej______________ ki\u0026gt;\\Ja Lt^fl.4-g~on rvu^M Vt? Ll^3P OiSciprrtt^ri P^dLAg^g mcftl__Re^arl lRSP  I It t' 0 t-KSQ Jl Ikf\\e*. */ou/ ta (RiitXDeh) ----- EXHIBITS ejections DATE No. Identification Rulings Offer/Rec'd) I I I1L^-6 Sa\u0026lt; CjC cy C,g4 CxI -C^ 6g^ Lex Ml -CXi 691 qx C-'f. w Ci. I vs. ot- 0.1 description 4-0 .er- Op, l\u0026lt;^Ap\u0026lt;art M e ma Vft C.ile\u0026lt;p/, LPt5 0 Ij-f. ALVACVoafAZ cause NO. r?-34\u0026gt; ^nareL O, ula.4sart Oi^cipiiwe. S\u0026lt;|ke\u0026lt;K Si u-3i-q2 Ujrwttuafy 4ak\u0026lt;U t-^-OI idt^P Flta.ent.u-y Cji.rUf a-J-it-.H - PtnH t-Rsp .Jh\u0026amp; rnz? fa^^1 ti-liet' .L Lear.',. ypd 'riS* ra^r^-^ S^j-kli-^O ^q-od t Ml \u0026lt;3a al Fp\u0026lt;\u0026gt;^rAwv E UaIu.a4 la rt fklnick. CluU 41-oa i \"jLilSO de-e I USO -l^S^rnta4 itv\\ re: -Hmer. Ac.kvcMeit' ex LfeSQ  Cof*mund4-id3 1j\u0026lt;\u0026amp; fees! Prafc4-icec CK C4\\ ql LlL_z^ I I Lg-SO uso LfcSt\\ LJtSP t)g.so n ! - PpA\u0026lt;U-ie-e - Curr /H4^-keM.a4-igS j Sg.ie\u0026gt;^c.e icul^fam. [iHsVracl.ari ftssgS5\nkxg^i- F(a ^SgSS\u0026gt;w.fc\\-V- ^foeessgs CiS.se\u0026gt;n*t ^aV^a^ fi (ig\u0026lt;:rKStne^i Resuli-S 1 A\u0026lt;aai - ^rg^rg-VA EoalualtoA(Kev. 1/80)  t Ij I j-.S (Rlit/DefO -------- EXHIBITS )j ections date No. Identification Rulings Offer/Rec'd) C)( I ^0^ 5 C\\C Q '6 I vs. description Li\u0026lt;SD u?.s tRse \" L^SO '* tr^sQ CK 'lio Ilksd \" c-yl nil Li^sn \" na cyl TI3 ^^4L211 tt Brii \u0026lt;* .S4-uA.^F Pfec4f^\nUlK I Pre CAUSE NO. - /\u0026gt;la.4-K j Sci dice ^ck p\u0026gt;\nv t ipC4V K^l fi u^so kfcSD LRSD /A\u0026lt;m6 Wor\\ C u i I I ) S vJun * Ui!  Cra\u0026lt;R.4-V-u, ateJ Pfa i  ' * - E Sckools -______/J t^k -Sg.kjotj f\u0026gt;rarai^a^4__________ -urrig.lu.wq OaccLi\u0026gt;\u0026gt;...e^4s ^^''l-ttSe ~l~a ISoai-el E~4u li-^-Cl -----------------------oV l3\u0026gt;rUxg|p.\u0026gt;U La.'tgh4:s a)C nn a-f Cg\u0026gt;ergt D\u0026gt;g __ini'eK/J ^reKv^eq.sg. 4- .^-KI ^l'=l kxSC E\u0026gt;o.xrda-fEJ ^^\u0026lt;251 ucgl-idw I -4- t 'I 6\u0026gt;%\u0026amp; j^UVMmer- ScliOdl ^\u0026lt;SO0 ]__.\\\u0026gt;aluq-Vi o I C)c! 'li.Ti I \u0026gt; Oi^ _it lEf'j__PiojrfUws 5-^-0/ ^\u0026gt;0\"g3L\u0026lt;Kev. l/ao)  JI LK-sn ejections DATE (Plft/Deft} EXHIBITS vs. No. Identification Rtiliiigs 'Offer/Rec'd) B-ao-D| C{ ^^4 1 description ^Av\\pu3 Le,gJ.rski'|J IcLA caus^Tno. raya^ Dra.p-f' ^-IS-i Al-J-tzr. t\u0026amp;Wj-Atn. A nVikrf.,Mc.^4 FttAkeUaH in.g 4-riJr*t Di\nia..vs fla-kej g-ll-i} niz) \u0026lt;^| \\ \u0026gt;Z^v f. 4-a 6kaj-/gy Lj4:i-r^ 5-xx-po S4u i Per, t On 'k J A, ifckoo i I c/ I I ^31 -----4-0 60 ,--------------------------------------------------VJ n3:x ^33 USD C\u0026lt;lm,pt\u0026lt;,s U j^SQ 0|d^ Pe^,\n-4-c^ ski 3^-1*? n sk.'k e ^=5^------'^^'1 l^cUxoal kj3rfl/ow.^4 Pla.\nF\\ppra\u0026gt;sJ Is. Ans. kaa' 1 - a \u0026lt;^x: dj'/A To prd/*\u0026lt;v*.\\p PlaaS Sc.(\\a^l Qaa.t~^i i -^^0____S-ksk^e, Bev,e..k fOnL/l\u0026lt;g.r fc\u0026gt;\u0026lt;5re ^krsal I Q I 1^/ I DHAr' k._ LRSO gft.-T c-t: 11is El.lni. -4- S I i ecancjarsj Ctv sFriday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H FRIDAY 119221994) WILLIAM H SUTTON. P A BYRON M EISEMAN. JR , P a JOE 0 BELL. P A JAMES A aUTTRY. P A FREDERICKS URSERY. P A OSCAR E DAVIS. JR . P A JAMES C CLARK. JR . P A THOMAS P LEGGETT, P A JOH.N DEWEY WATSON. P A PAUL B BENHAM ill. P A LARRY W BURKS. P A A WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR . P A JAMES EDWARD KARRIS. P A I PHILLIP MALCOM. P A JAMES M SIMPSON. P A JAMES M SAXTON. P A J SHEPHERD RUSSELL III. P A. DONALD H BACON, P A WILLIA.M THOMAS BAXTER. P A BARRY E COPLIN. P A RICHARD D TAYLOR. P A JOSEPH B HURST. JR . P A ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P A CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P A LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P A ROBERT S SHAFER. P A WILLIAM M GRIFFIN HI. P A MICHAEL S MOORE. P A DIANE S MACKEY. P A Walter m ebel hi. p a KEVIN A CRASS. P A WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR.. P.A SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. M GAYLE CORLEY. P A ROBERT B BEACH. JR . P A J LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR . P A HARRY A LICHT. P A SCOTT H TUCKER. P.A GUY ALTON WADE. P A PRICE C GARDNER. P A TONIA P JONES. P A DAVID D WILSON. P A ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.fridayfjrm.com 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 601-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE. SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72703-4811 TELEPHONE 501-685-2011 FAX 501-695-2147 JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A. DAVID M. GRAF. P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINKOUR. P.A. JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR.. P.A JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGLIO. P A. R CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A. GREGORY D. TAYLOR. P.A. TONY L. WILCOX, P.A FRAN C. HICKMAN. P.A. BETTY J. DEMORY. P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON, P.A. JAMES W. SMITH. P.A. CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT. P.A. DANIEL L. HERRINGTON. P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K. COLEMAN WESTBROOK. JR ALLISON J CORNWELL ELLEN M OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL MICHAEL E. KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. IFRAH JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN A. KASTEN BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN A. BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KARENS HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON PHILIP B. MONTGOMERY KRISTENS. RIGGINS ALAN C. BRYAN orCOUNSEL B S CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. A.D. MCALLISTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-782-2898 FAX 870-762-2918 November 1, 2001 CHRISTOPHER HELLER LITTLE ROCK TEL S01-370-1S0* FAX 501-244-S344 halltrOftc.nat Hand Delivered Mr. John Walker received JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 NOV 2 2001 Re: LRSD V. PCSSC OFFICE OF desegregation MONITOSIKQ Dear John: Enclosed is our Exhibit and Witness List for the November 19-20, 2001 hearing. Yours very truly, Christopher Heller I CJH^k Enclosures cc: Clay Fendley all counsel1. Dr. Bonnie Lesley 2. Dr. Leslie V. Gamine 3. Dr. Ken James 4. Dr. Linda Watson 5. Sadie Mitchell 6. James Washington 7. Dr. Kathy Lease 8. Jo Evelyn Elston 9. Dr. Steven Ross 10. Dr. Katherine Mitchell 11. Michael Daugherty 12. Judy Magness 13. H. Baker Kurrus 14. Larry Berkley 15. Tony Rose 16. Sue Strickland 17. Jonathan Lupton 18. Doug Murray 19. David Yarberry/Pattie Allen 20. Dr. Don Roberts F.\\J10ME\\BRENDAK'Jnd\\des-un)iary-wit-iist-11-19-01 wpd LRSD Witness List November 19-20, 2001 21. 22. received NOV 2 ?eoi WSffiREBAWJffiffligjjiig The Joshua class representative(s) and monitors Any witness listed by Joshua.* w - RECEIVED Exhibit No. 1.: 1. 2. 3. LRSD EXHIBIT LIST FOR NOVEMBER 19-20, 2001 NOV 2 2001 OfflSOF KSBSHESAnaSiOTOT LRSD Notebook of Information on Communications about African American Achievement. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 18, 1998, setting up meeting to review Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and specifically to discuss need to open access and ensure success of African Americans in Advanced Placement courses Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 27, 1998, following up on the August 26 meeting with list of assignments and possible program strands to use in planning Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 18, 1998, on K-12 Talent Development\nadded Elorace Smith to committee on AP\nattached several articles relating to minorities in AP courses A. B. C. The Canary in the Mine: The Achieivement Gap Between Black and White Students by Mano Singham from September 1998 Kappan The Philadelphia Partnership: Improving College Access and Retention Among Minority and Low-Income Students by Steven Ender, et al in the Summer 1998 issue of The College Board Review. Some articles about the Talent Development Middle School model researched by Mona Briggs. 4. Copy of an article from The American Prospect, September/October 1998 distributed to staff, The Black-White Test Score Gap, by Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips. 5. Copy of an article distributed to staff from Education Week, Sept. 9, 1998, Bridging the Remediation Gap\nWhy We Must (and How We Can) Align K-12 Standards with College Placement by Michael Kirst. 6. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to secondary principals, December 16, 1998, urging them to convene a staff committee to determine ways to enroll as many students as possible in the Pre-AP and AP courses\nspecific reference to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 7. Memorandum to principals from Bonnie Lesley, Feb. 8, 1999, on high expectations with attached article from ERIC, Expectations for Students. 1- 8. Memorandum to principals from Boimie Lesley, Feb. 12, 1999, on the importance of building relationships between teachers and students for improved student achievement\narticle attached, Working with Students and Adults from Poverty by Ruby Payne. 9. Memorandum to high school principals, counselors, and registrars from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 27, 1999Administrative Directive: High School Curriculum\nsection on Equity, with specific references to section 2.6 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and the importance of curriculum access. 10. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in September 1, 1999, Learning Links on Teaching ALL the Kids\nattached article by Adela Solis, Extending Advanced Skills Instruction into the Education of Disadvantaged Students 11. Memorandum from Boimie Lesley in September 22, 1999, Learning Links celebrating the big jump in numbers of students earning a 3 or above on the Advanced Placement examinations\nattached tables. 12. Memorandum in October 13, 1999, Learning Links on Getting Smart and attaching an article, Making American Smarter: A Centurys Assumptions About Inate Ability Give Way to a Belief in the Power of Effort, by Lauren Resnick. 13. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, November 10, 1999, reconvening the K-12 Talent Development Committee to work on a local adaptation of Project AVID, in collaboration with Dr. Terrence Roberts\nspecific references to the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan\nsummary of initiatives already implemented\netc. 14. Memorandum to principals from Bonnie Lesley in December 1, 1999, Learning Links recommending transition strategies from one level of schooling to another to improve academic achievement. A. Summer Programs Help Students Adjust to Key Transition Points B. When Standards Fails 15. Article in December 1, 1999, Learning Links: Teaching AP European History in a Multiethnic Setting for principals 16. Memorandum in January 26, 2000, Learning Links with attached article, Why Every Child in America Deserves a School Where She/He is Known and Valued by Davis Marshak. 17. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to high school principals and other staff, Jan. 24, 2000, attaching an article on College Freshmen Bored by High School Senior Year. 218. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in February 9, 2000, Learning Links on how to improve student achievement\nattached article, Improving Chicagos Schools 19. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Division of Instruction and Cabinet, March 9, 2000, attaching an article by Anne Quindlen from Newsweek on The Best High Schools and the importance of challenging courses. 20. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to staff, March 16, 2000, relating to placing into the budget needed funds for the administration of the Pre-AP and AP programs. 21. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in March 22, 2000, Learning Links on the importance of students taking challenging courses\nattached article from Southern Regional Education Board, Good News, Bad News and Actions for Helping II Students Complete a Challenging Program of Study. 22. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff, April 12, 2000, inviting us to hear Dr. Andrew Billingsley speak on The Black Family. 23. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle and high school staff in April 19, 2000, Learning Links on attendance at the Administrators AP Conference\nreference to Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 24. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in May 3, 2000, Learning Links encouraging participation in Dr. Terrence Roberts training on Learning to Cope with Differences and attaching a reading list that might be helpful. 25. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in May 3, 2000, Learning Links related to Project AVID\nattached article by Mary Catherine Swanson, Education for the New Millennium. 26. E-mail from Bormie Lesley to various staff. May 4, 2000, with rationale for changes in the graduation requirements and the importance of high expectations for all students. 27. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in May 17, 2000, Learning Links on equity\nattached article, We Should Not Kid Ourselves: Excellence Requires Equity, by Bradley Scott. 28. E-mail from Les Camine to staff, July 25, 2000, with attached article, Is the Test Score Gap Really Color Based? by William Bainbridge. 29. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to high school curriculum staff, Aug. 11, 2000, with attached article on Advanced Placement, Not Exclusion. 30. Memorandum to Associate Superintendents, September 11, 2000, from Bonnie Lesley on the role of counselors in enhancing academic achievement. 331. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, October 2, 2000, with copy of a self-assessment instruction, Bridging the Gap: Self-Assessment Instrument developed by the Mackenzie Group, Washington, DC. 32. Memorandum to principals from Bonnie Lesley, October 2, 2000, with attached report, Dispelling the Myth\nHigh Poverty Schools Exceeding Expectations. 33. Memorandum to principals in November 1, 2000, Learning Links on stereotype research and attaching an article by Claude Steele, Stereotype Threat and the Test Performance of Academically Successful African Americans, from the book. The Black-White Test Score Gap by Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips\nreference to Terrence Roberts. 34. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to NSF team, Nov. 16, 2000, advising them of the purchase of the video-tapes from the Columbus meeting for NSF participants on Bridging the Gap. 35. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff, Nov. 20, 2000, advising them of the importance of successful implementation of the IB programs at Cloverdale Middle and McClellan High if the magnet grant got funded. 36. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Les Camine, Nov. 20, 2000, with rationale for building in incentives for African American students to take challenging courses\nreferences the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 37. E-mail from Suzi Davis to a parent, Dec. 5, 2000, with an explanation of the criteria for placement of students in advanced courses and the differentiated curriculum for Pre-AP at the middle school level. 38. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to the Board of Education, Dec. 14, 2000, proposing changes in the graduation requirements, with rationale\nreferences to equity and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Exhibit No. 2.: LRSD Notebook of Information on Communicating Best Practices. 1. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Sept. 18, 1998, establishing procedures for the publication of Learning Links, a weekly publication for principals from the Division. Literacy 1. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 26, 1998, on development of the literacy plan\nattached article, Urban School Development: Literacy as a Lever for Change. 4s . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to middle school principals in Dec. 9, 1998, Learning Links with references to three books providing the research base for the middle school ReadingAVriting Workshop program. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to principals in Jan. 6, 1999, Learning Links with suggested books that outline best practices in the development of literacy. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle school principals in Jan. 13, 1999, Learning Links advising them of multiple copies of books they will receive on best practice in teaching middle-level literacy. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to principals in Jan. 21, 1999, Learning Links on potential programs to remediate reading problems. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals in July 21, 1999, Learning Links advising them they will receive an additional book on development of literacy. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle and high school principals in August 4, 1999, Learning Links relating to remediating reading problems at the secondary level\nattached article from Harvard Education Letter, Johnny Still Cant Read? Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle school principals in Aug. 25, 1999, Learning Links on teacher participation in training and on strategies for developing vocabulary\nattached article, Six Whole Class Vocabulary Strategies for the Content Areas by Hanus, et al and Teaching Vocabulary in the Subject Areas by Karen Wood. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle school principals in September 1, 1999, Learning Links on teaching reading to students performing at the lowest levels\nattached articles. A. B. C. D. E. A research synthesis on what works in restructuring urban middle school reading and writing programs. Reading Comprehension Instruction for At-Risk Students: Research- Based Practices that Can Make a Difference Teaching Them All to Read: Results of a Nationwide Study of Successful Literacy Programs for Young Adolescents Alternatives to More of the Same for Poor Readers' Students at Risk: The Slow Reader in the Middle Grades 510. Memorandum to SEA principals from Bonnie Lesley, Nov. 15, 1999, on evaluation research on SEA\nattached article, Success for All: A Summary of Evaluations by Jeanne Weiler. 11. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Nov. 17, 1999, Learning Links on early literacy\nsummary of research on what works in high-poverty schools\ncharacteristics of effective teachers\nattached article, Study Details Effectiveness of High-Poverty Schools in Reading Education During Early Grades from Michigan State University. 12. Memorandum to principals in Dec. 8, 1999, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley on how to teach vocabulary\nattached article, Making Vocabulary Development Manageable in Content Instruction by Katherine Misulis. 13. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals, Dec. 17, 1999, requesting information on the implementation of Animated Literacy at the kindergarten level. 14. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to elementary and middle school principals, Jan. 11, 2000, with suggestions for the next years Title I budget\npotential changes in SPA. 15. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals in Jan. 12, 2000, Learning Links with research on Direct Instruction and Success for All\nattached article, Prepackaged School Reform by Jay Mathews. 16. Memorandum to elementary principals and brokers in Mar. 22, 2000, Learning Links on research-based reading program\nattached research summary, Improving the Reading Achievement of Americas Children: 10 Research- Based Principles. 17. Memorandum to high school principals in Apr. 12, 2000, Learning Links on the research base for the ninth grade English I Workshop program\nattached chapter from Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in Americas Schools. 18. E-mail from Kathy Lease to middle and high school principals. May 30, 2000, advising caution in using only one set of data to make decisions about program changes. 19. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to reading staff. Mar. 19, 2000, on evaluating the content of the professional development program for teaching reading. 20. Memorandum to Suzi Davis and Barbara Brandon, March 26, 2000, asking them to develop a program to address needs of middle and high school students with low performance in reading. 621. Research Report, Every Child Reading: A Professional Development Guide, November 2000 22. Research base for Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) 23. Report: Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas, General Information. 24. Research Report from Educational Research Service, How Children Learn: What Cognitive Research Tells Us About Effective Instruction. 25. Research Report from NCREL, Meaningful, Engaged Learning and Components of a Learner-Active, Technology Infused Classroom: What It Looks Like. 26. Research Report from National Reading Panel, Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction. April 2000. 27. Whats the Big Idea? Integrating Young Adult Literature in the Middle School, from the January 2001 English Journal. 28. To Grammar or Not to Grammar: That Is NOT the Question, from Voices from the Middle: Contextualizing Grammar by Constance Weaver, Carol McNally, and Sharon Moerman. 29. Just the Facts: Research and Theory about Grammar Instruction, from Voices from the Middle: Contextualizing Grammar by Constance Weaver, Carol McNally, and Sharon Moerman. 30. Developing Students Textual Intelligence Through Grammar, from Voices from the Middle: Contextualizing Grammar by Constance Weaver, Carol McNally, and Sharon Moerman. 31. The Evolution of Middle Schools by Paul George in December 2000 Education Leadership. 32. Holding Sacred Ground: The Impact of Standardization by Carl Glickman in December 2000 Education Leadership. 33. Response to Literature as a Cultural Activity, Reading Research Quarterly, January/ February/March 2000. 34. Reading AloudAre Students Ever Too Old? from Education World. Memorandum from Dennis Glasgow to secondary science teachers, Jan. 11, 1999, on ninth grade physics implementation. 7Exhibit No. 3: LRSD Notebook of Information on Best Practice in Curriculum and Instruction. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 26, 1998, with attached excerpt from book by Douglas Reeves (ADE consultant on implementation of Smart Start), Making Standards Work: How to Implement Standards-Based Assessments in the Classroom. School, and District. Memorandum to principals in Oct. 28, 1998, Learning Links information about a recommended book. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in Americas Schools. Memorandum to principals in Nov. 11, 1998, Learning Links\nattached speech by Hayes Mizell, Principals as Leaders in Standards-Based Reform. Memorandum to staff in Aug. 11, 1999, Learning Links on a new publication^ Taking Responsibility for Ending Social Promotion. Memorandum in Aug. 18, 1999, Learning Links on curriculum standards\nattached article, Realizing the Promise of Standards-Based Education. Letter to McRel Institute, Sept. 16, 1999, requesting permission to make copies of certain pages of Essential Knowledge: The Debate Over What American Students Should Know. Memorandum in Nov. 9, 1999, Learning Links on standards-based reform\nattached article by Mike Schmoker and Robert Marzano. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Nov. 22, 1999, establishing a committee to develop Instructional Standards for the District\nattached copies of several research-based models for consideration. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Dec. 8, 1999, with follow-up to committee working on Instructional Standards\nattachments to support the work, including research article from ERS, How Children Learn: What Cognitive Research Tells Us About Effective Instruction. 10. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Dec. 14, 1999, with more models to consider for the Instructional Standards. 11. Memorandum to Terrence Roberts, Steve Ross, ODM, John Walker, and CTA from Bonnie Lesley, Dec. 15, 1999, requesting their input on the work relating to development of Instructional Standards. 812. Document: Summary of Teaching and Learning Research-Based Models, prepared for June 2000 workshop for high school teachers and used subsequently in other meetings as a summary of best practice. 13. Memorandum in Oct. 4, 2000, Learning Links to principals from Bonnie Lesley on readings before the Oct. 25-26 workshop on Teaching and Learning\nattached three articles. 14. Memorandum to Division of Instruction from Bormie Lesley, June 7, 2001, on constructivism with attached publication from Detroit Public Schools. Exhibit No. 4.: LRSD Notebook of Information on Mathematics/Science. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 8. 9. Memorandum from Dennis Glasgow to secondary science teachers, Jan. 11, 1999, on ninth grade physics implementation. Memorandum from Dennis Glasgow to principals, Aug. 25, 1999, on the deployment of mathematics/science lead teachers. Mathematics Program Descriptiondocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Science Program Descriptiondocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. K-12 Curriculum Implementation Plandocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. CPMSA Staffingdocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Professional Development Plan for Mathematics and Sciencedocument prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Little Rock CPMSA Strategic Plan, September 2000February 2002document prepared to submit to the National Science Foundation in April 2000. Memorandum from Vanessa Cleaver to eighth grade mathematics teachers, May 9, 2000, on the extended-year Algebra I program. 10. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to a parent. Mar. 23, 2000, providing research base for the middle school mathematics program, the Cormected Mathematics Project (CMP). 93 . 11. Memorandum from Boimie Lesley to elementary and middle school principals in June 14, 2000, Learning Links on the research and theory behind new mathematics curricula\nattached article, Wheres the Balance in Math Instruction? 12. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to parents, Nov. 9, 2000, with information about research behind LRSDs adoption of the elementary mathematics program. 13. E-mail from Debbie Berry to Bonnie Lesley, Nov. 17, 2000, expressing appreciation for attendance at a national conference on new mathematics curriculum. 14. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Feb. 14, 2000, Learning Links on national study on how best to teach mathematics\nattached article from Education Week, Forget Math Feud, Take Broader View, NRC Panel Urges. 15. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Aug. 23, 2000, Learning Links on standards-based mathematics\nattached article, Spread the Word by Lee Stiff. 16. Research Report on new mathematics curriculum used in decision-making: Preliminary Comparison of Michigan State Wide Testing\nResults in STC Adopted Districts, June 18, 1998. 17. Research Report on Exemplary Promising Mathematics Programs, Eisenhower National Clearinghouse. 18. Research Report on Connected Mathematics as one of the Exemplary Promising Mathematics Programs, Eisenhower National Clearinghouse 19. Research Report, Middle Grades Mathematics Textbooks: A Benchmarks- Based Evaluation, Project 2061. 20. Research Report, Investigations in Numbers, Data and Space: Validation StudyPretest and Posttest Results, Scott Foresman, Jan. 12, 2001. Exhibit No. 5.: LRSD Notebook of Information on Assessment Planning/Training Activities. 1. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals, Oct. 20, 1998, providing information on Smart Start training on standards, assessments, and accountability 2. Copy of handout from ADEs training for educators on Smart Start: Higher Student Achievement through Standards and Performance Assessment, fall 1998 103. Plan and Process Alignment for Improved Student Achievement, Little Rock School District (Matrix showing relationship of various required plans to District processes), created fall 1998 4. Invitation to meeting on Systemic Planning Session for Assessment and Program Evaluation, May 18, 1999 5. Agenda for Assessment and Program Evaluation Work Session, May 18, 1999 6. Portfolio of Services of Division of Instruction, 1999-2000 7. Agenda for Division of Instruction, June 17, 1999 meeting\npresentation on the LRSD Assessment Plan 8. Memorandum in July 28, 1999, Learning Links with attached article on Changing the Entitlement Culture -emphasis on results rather than process. 9. LRSD Assessment Plan\nUsing Assessment to Enhance Student Achievement (PowerPoint presentation slides)presented to Board of Education in August 1999 10. Reading List prepared to distribute at the summer 2000 Campus Leadership Institute\nsection on Building and Maintaining Accountability Systems is about assessment and program evaluation 11. Transparencies used in July 19, 2000, Curriculum Day for principals, assistant principals, and brokers. 12. Notebook/handouts for July 19, 2000, Curriculum Dayfocus on quality management, data-driven decisions, and LRSD assessment programs 13. Memorandum in August 23, 2000, Learning Links with attached Primer on Assessment Literacy for distribution to Campus Leadership Teams 14. District Assessments: The Assessment Program for 2000-01 15. Memorandum to the Board of Education for July 26, 2001, agenda on Proposed Amendments to the Assessment Program Memorandum to elementary and junior high principals, Nov. 16, 1998, on schedule for picking up SAT9 testing materials Exhibit No. 6: LRSD Notebook of Information on Assessment Processes(Examples). 1. Memorandum to elementary and junior high principals, Nov. 16, 1998, on schedule for picking up SAT9 testing materials 11 s. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to elementary school principals, Dec. 14, 1998, on procedures for upcoming administration of the criterion-referenced tests in reading and mathematics Memorandum to elementary and junior high principals, Jan. 5, 1999, on the testing procedures for grades 4 and 8 ACTAAP Benchmark examinations Memorandum to elementary and junior high principals and counselors, Jan. 26, 1999, on inservice schedule for test coordinators for the ACTAP Benchmarks for grades 4 and 8 Memorandum to selected administrators on Data Quality with attached paper written by Dr. Glynn Ligon Memorandum to elementary principals, Aug. 17, 1999, relating to use of released items from Smart Start assessments E-mail to curriculum staff, Aug. 23,1999, relating to use of released items from Smart Start assessments E-mail to elementary and middle school principals, Sept. 17, 1999, inviting them to an overview session on the new pre- and post-test Achievement Level Tests developed by Northwest Evaluation Association. Memorandum in Sept. 22, 1999, Learning Links to principals identifying training needs to administer the Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment 10. Memorandum to principals and K-2 teachers in March 15, 2000, Learning Links setting up an assessment training review for the Developmental Reading Assessment and Observation Survey 11. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley on Mar. 17, 2000, suggesting a resource on how to assess technology knowledge 12. Memorandum in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links to elementary and middle school principals and test coordinators on new information relating to ACTAAP Benchmark examinations in grades 4 and 8 and the field testing in grade 6. 13. Document entitled Description of the Assessment System prepared in April 2000 in response to a request from the National Science Foundationrelating to the assessment of mathematics and science 14. Document entitled Procedures for Providing Data Analysis/Interpretation to Decision Makers prepared in April 2000 in response to a request from the 12National Science Foundation^relating to the assessment of mathematics and science 15. Document entitled Orientation to the Analysis and Interpretation of Test Results prepared in April 2000 in response to a request from the National Science Foundationrelating to the assessment of mathematics and science. 16. E-mail to Kathy Lease, May 23,2000, providing feedback to proposed survey of middle school students and teachers. 17. E-mail to principals, Aug. 25, 2000, providing information on upcoming administration of the Achievement Level Tests in September. 18. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 31, 2000, providing information on new middle school report card 19. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 31,2000, providing copy of new middle school report card report 20. Memorandum from Linda Austin to Marian Lacey providing Middle School Report Card Update 21. E-mail to middle school principals, Jan. 3, 2000, setting up training for teachers on how to administer the State Benchmark examinations 22. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Feb. 1, 2000, setting agenda for Feb. 2 meeting\nincludes information on the District Assessment Plan 23. E-mail to elementary principals, Feb. 1, 2000, providing information on the use of calculators on Benchmark examinations 24. E-mail to principals, Feb. 3, 2000, providing copy of assessment schedule/matrix to distribute to teachers 25. Document prepared in fall 1999 by PRE on Achievement Level Tests: Assessments that Make a Difference 26. Memorandum to all principals and test coordinators, Mar. 17, 2000, establishing training sessions for the administration of the Benchmark and end-of-course examinations 27. Memorandum in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links to high school principals and test coordinators providing new information from ADE on the end-of-course literacy examination 1328. E-mail to Kathy Lease and Les Gamine, Apr. 7, 2000, providing rationale for adding science assessments to the Achievement Level Tests 29. Memorandum in Aug. 30, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals and K-2 teachers including pre-testing instructions for the Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment 30. Memorandum in Aug. 30, 2000, Learning Links to all principals and test coordinators establishing inservice schedule for administration of the SAT9 and ALTS 31. Memorandum in Sept. 8, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals relating to K-2 assessment and the importance of the language arts instructional block 32. Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to elementary and middle school principals relating to the administration of the end-of-module tests in mathematics and the end-of-unit tests in science 33. Memorandum in Sept. 26, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals relating to instructions to complete the Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment 34. Memorandum to principals, Oct. 13, 2000, requesting feedback through a survey for consideration by the Assessment Focus Group\ncopy of survey attached 35. Memorandum to principals, Feb. 13, 2001, with information on the administration of the climate surveys for parents, teachers, students, and administrators 36. E-mail, Feb. 26, 2001, relating to administration of surveys for the Extended Year Education school evaluation 37. E-mail to curriculum directors, Feb. Tl, 2001, relating to discussion of the potential purchase of an electronic curriculum/assessment management system 38. E-mail to principals and selected others on Mar. 1, 2001, relating to an information session on ALT online testing 39. E-mail to principals. Mar. 1, 2001, providing spring testing schedule for elementary, middle, and high schools 40. E-mail to Les Gamine, Mar. 8, 2001, providing outline of PRE responsibilities for Dr. James, incoming superintendent 41. Memorandum to elementary principals. Mar. 14, 2001, providing information on end-of-module mathematics criterion-referenced tests 1442. E-mail between various staff. Mar. 14-15, 2001, relating to analysis of results of mathematics and science criterion-referenced tests 43. Document entitled Mathematics, Reading, and Language Achievement Tests: Administration Guide prepared by PRE for use in training sessions for the ALTs, 2000-01 Exhibit No. 7: LRSD Notebook of Information on Dissemination of Assessment Results. 1. Memorandum to elementary principals and teachers in Feb. 3, 1999, Learning Links, attaching the results for the second quarter reading and mathematics CRTs 2. Memorandum to Les Camine, June 1, 1999, providing status report on the development of the Quality Index and reporting on recommendations of Dr. Steve Ross relating to the assessment program 3. E-mail to Cabinet, Sept. 28, 1999, providing preview of grade 8 Benchmark examination results 4. E-mail to middle school principals, Oct. 8, 1999, relating to dissemination of Benchmark results 5. E-mail between Lucy Neal and Kathy Lease, Oct. 28-Nov. 2, 1999, relating to need for SAT9 scores to evaluate Title VI 6. Memorandum to Judy Milam, Nov. 4, 1999, requesting report on quarterly SFA assessments 7. Memorandum to Kathy Lease, Nov. 4, 1999, requesting report on DRA results for fall 8. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Dec. 3, 1999, advising her of Dr. Camines request for results of climate surveys 9. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 3, 2000, with report on Advanced Placement scores 10. Memorandum to principals in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links providing information on packets being sent to schools on ALT results 11. E-mail to John Ruffins and Kathy Lease, Apr. 12, 2000, requesting course enrollment data for NSF report 12. Memorandum to principals and teachers in Apr. 26, 2000, Learning Links with comparisons of second quarter CRT results for 1998-99 and 1999-2000 1513. E-mail to Diane Barksdale, Apr. 19, 2000, providing feedback on ALT scores 14. Memorandum to all principals in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 15. Memorandum to counselors and ALT coordinators in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 16. Memorandum to professional staff of Division of Instruction in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 17. E-mail to Dennis Glasgow and Ed Williams, May 15, 2000, requesting a special report on the middle school ALT mathematics scores 18. E-mail to SEA principals. May 23, 2000, relating to training for SEA schools for improved academic achievement 19. E-mail to Virginia Johnson, May 19-23, 2000, relating to data collections for NSF evaluations and results of middle school student survey 20. E-mail to elementary principals, June 1,2000, relating to results of 1999-2000 Developmental Reading Assessment 21. E-mail to Kathy Lease, June 7, 2000, requesting report on Science ALTs 22. E-mail to Virginia Johnson and Ed Williams, June 7, 2000, relating to data requests from Dr. Camine 23. E-mail to Kathy Lease, June 7, 2000, requesting results of middle school student survey 24. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 23, 2000, requesting interpretation of DRA results 25. E-mail to Les Camine, July 7, 2000, providing information on interpretation of DRA results 26. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Ed Williams, and Linda Austin, July 13, 2000, requesting data for Southwest Education Development Lab relating to implementation of the Collaborative Action Team 27. E-mail to Sadie Mitchell and Frances Cawthon Jones, July 14, 2000, relating to DRA interpretations 1628. E-mail to Pat Busbea, Patricia Price, and Ed Williams, July 14, 2000, relating to interpretation of DRA results\nattached document defines proficient 29. E-mail to Patricia Price and Pat Busbea, July 17, 2000, requesting correlation of teacher participation in ELLA training and student achievement 30. E-mail to elementary staff, July 21, 2000, attaching copy of presentation slides to the Campus Leadership Institute on DRA results 31. E-mail to Leon Adams, July 28, 2000, providing rationale from Mitchell Academy for the abandonment of Success for All, based on data analysis 32. E-mail to selected SFA principals, Aug. 8, 2000, with report on achievement of SFA schools as compared to others and with suggestions on possible abandonment of SFA based on data analysis 33. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 9, 2000, from Freddie Fields relating to possible modification of SFA and requesting ELLA training, based on data analysis 34. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Sept. 14, 2000, from Linda Austin requesting copy of LRSD Assessment Notebook 35. Memorandum to curriculum division, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmark examinations 36. Memorandum to Board of Directors, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmarks 37. Memorandum to Cabinet, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmarks 38. Memoranda to selected principals, Nov. 3, 2000, congratulating them for achievement on grade 4 Benchmarks 39. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Nov. 6, 2000, requesting several sets of data to include in Compliance Report 40. E-mail to Patricia Price and Dennis Glasgow, Nov. 8, 2000, attaching spreadsheets on Benchmark data by SES status 41. E-mail to Kathy Lease from Tara Adams, Jan. 17, 2001, requesting information on interpretation of the ALT results 42. E-mail to principals and cabinet, Jan. 17, 2001, with attached reports on SAT9 scores, five-year comparison\nSAT9, three-year comparison\nand SAT9 quartile report. 1743. E-mail to principals, May 30, 2000, with attached sample letter to parents that can accompany the ALT results 44. Document entitled Identified Issues from Data/Attendance Focus Group prepared by PRE 45. Document entitled Assessment Window prepared with advice from Focus Group 46. Document entitled Assessment Advisory Committee, 2000-01 with names of advisory committee members 47. Copies of PowerPoint presentation to Board of Education, Nov. 16, 2000: A Quick Look at the 4* Grade Benchmark Exam and a Preview of the SAT-9 48. E-mail to Steve Ross, Nov. 20, 2000, including feedback to a draft plan he had written relating to loan forgiveness 49. E-mail to principals and Cabinet, Nov. 29, 2000, with information on how to access test data on the ADE web page 50. Memorandum to IRC Staff, Dec. 1, 2000, relating to available SAT9 and Benchmark reports 51. Memorandum to middle school principals, Dec. 11, 2000, attaching reports on assignments of eighth graders to high schools 52. E-mail to SFA principals and facilitators, Feb. 23, 2001, announcing training on the SFA Student Data Base 53. E-mail to Virginia Johnson, Mar. 14, 2001, relating to analysis of end-of-module test results 54. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 23, 2001, with attached information on the Duke Talent Search 55. E-mail to middle school principals, June 29, 2001, reminding them of information sent to them earlier about how to access test data on the ADE web site 56. E-mail to principals, June 29, 2001, attaching copies of DRA test results 18Exhibit No. 8:. LRSD Notebook of Information on Planning for Program Evaluation. 1. Memorandum to designated principals from Mona Briggs, Aug. 23, 1999, providing information on standards for accreditation from ADE 2. Memorandum to elementary staff, Jan. 20, 1999, relating to an ADE evaluation of Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) 3. Memorandum to Kathy Lease and Ed Williams, June 29, 1999, on program evaluation with attached articles on qualitative research and an example of a research report from Austin ISD by Glynn Ligon 4. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Feb. 1, 2000, with agenda relating to program implementation 5. E-mail to Virginia Johnson and Debbie Milam, Feb. 4, 2000, suggesting a model for the evaluation of VIPS programs 6. Memorandum in March 15, 2000, Learning Link relating to progress made by schools implementing the ALT assessment program 7. Document from Kathy Lease- alendar of meetings with Dr. Steve Ross since March 15, 2000\nattached planning document on program evaluation 8. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 24, 2000, providing information about a meeting with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss the middle school evaluation 9. E-mail to Kathy Lease, May 23, 2000, providing feedback on proposed middle school student survey 10. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Marian Lacey, and Sadie Mitchell, June 12, 2000, from Les Camine requesting information about the middle school evaluation 11. E-mail from Steve Ross to Kathy Lease, June 27, 2000, with attached design notes for Title I/Elementary Literacy Program Evaluation 12. E-mail from Kathy Lease to her staff, Aug. 6, 2000, requesting them to place the memorandum and program evaluations on the Board agenda 13. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Camine, Aug. 10, 2000, providing copies of drafts of the ESL and middle school evaluations\nthen his questions and her answers. 14. Memorandum to Board of Education, Aug. 24, 2000, from Kathy Lease presenting the program evaluations: Title I/Elementary Literacy, LRCPMSA 19(mathematics and science), English as a Second Language, and Middle School Transition and Program Implementation. Attached is her PowerPoint presentation: Program Evaluation. 15. E-mail from Steve Ross to Les Camine, Sept. 7, 2000, giving his feedback to the program evaluation reports. 16. E-mail from Debbie Milam to Cabinet members, Sept. 20, 2000, requesting permission to conduct interviews of parents on the subject of parental involvement. 17. E-mail from Kathy Lease to staff, Oct. 11, 2000, advising them of an upcoming meeting with Dr. Steve Ross related to program evaluation 18. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley and Vanessa Cleaver, Oct. 20, 2000, relating to our required participation in an evaluation study conducted by the National Science Foundation 19. Memorandum to Gene Jones, ODM, from Kathy Lease, Oct. 27, 2000, inviting him to an intensive work session with Dr. Steve Ross on program evaluation 20. Document prepared by PRE in November 2000 that lists Additional Programs and Strategies Requesting Evaluation 21. E-mail to Cabinet members from Kathy Lease, Nov. 28, 2000, attaching Dr. Steve Ross planned presentation to the Board of Education on Using Evaluation for Program Improvement: Lessons Learned 22. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Virginia Johnson, Jan. 2, 2001, setting up a meeting to finalize CPMSA program evaluation plan 23. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, Jan. 3, 2001, attaching her tentative plan 24. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Camine and Junious Babbs, Jan. 5, 2001, providing information relating to outsourcing program evaluations to Dr. John Nunnery 25. E-mail from/to Virginia Johnson, Jan. 5-20, 2000, relating to submission of Core Data Elements to the National Science Foundation 26. E-mail from/to Virginia Johnson, Apr. 14-16, 2000, relating to CPMSA program evaluation issues 27. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Camine, Jan. 22, 2001, attaching a draft of the work from Dr. John Nunnery 2028. Memorandum (one of several) from Kathy Lease, Jan. 24, 2001, inviting participants to the first meeting of the Research Committee 29. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to John Walker, Jan. 24, 2001, inviting him to participate in first meeting of Research Committee 30. Agenda for Feb. 5, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 31. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Eddie McCoy, Ed Williams, and Karen Broadnax, Feb. 16, 2001, to set up a meeting to discuss ESL program evaluation 32. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to Research Committee setting up Feb. 26, 2001, meeting 33. Agenda for Feb. 26, 2001, Research Committee meeting and sign-in sheet 34. Invoice from Dr. John Nunnery to LRSD for services rendered, February-March 2001 35. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA staff, Feb. 21, 2001, setting up a meeting to discuss the CPMSA program evaluation 36. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, March 14, 2001, providing updates 37. E-mail to middle school staff from Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 15, 2001, summarizing a meeting to plan for a Middle School Team Leaders Institute, including recognition of need to train team leaders on assessment and using data 38. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA staff. Mar. 19, 2001, setting up follow-up meeting to discuss CPMSA program evaluation 39. Memorandum to Carnegie Management Team, March 20, 2001, from Bonnie Lesley with information about counseling program and need for a program evaluation 40. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, Apr. 16, 2001, setting up next meeting on summer school evaluation and program evaluation for the National Science Foundation grant 41. Sign-in sheet for Apr. 23, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee 42. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Dennis Glasgow, Suzi Davis, and Laura Beth Arnold, April 17, 2001, to discuss program evaluation for Element 5 of the Safe Schools/ Healthy Students project 2143. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 18, 2001, relating to next steps in providing information about SAT9 item analyses for teachers 44. E-mail from Mona Briggs to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 25, 2001, relating to survey needs for national evaluation of Safe Schools/ Healthy Students project 45. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to elementary and middle school staff, Apr. 26, 2001, summarizing a large scale study that links classroom practices to student achievement in mathematics 46. E-mail among team working on CPMSA program evaluation, Apr. 18-May 2, 2001, relating to model for program evaluation and data analysis 47. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, May 2, 2001, with attached latest version of the Guidelines for Program Evaluations 48. Agenda for May 7, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 49. E-mail from Don Crary to Bonnie Lesley, May 24, 2001, announcing that a program evaluator had been hired by New Futures to conduct the program evaluation for Safe Schools/ Healthy Students 50. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee with attached memorandum relating to next meeting on June 11, 2001 51. Agenda for June 11, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 52. E-mail from Junious Babbs to Bonnie Lesley, June 12, 2001, relating to information on program evaluation 53. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Compliance Team, June 14, 2001, with an outline of a plan for the completion of the Middle School Evaluation 54. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, June 14, 2001, attaching a copy of final draft of Dr. Nunnerys evaluation of the mathematics/science programs 55. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to Ed Williams, July 3, 2001, requesting additional ALT reports 56. E-mail from Vanessa Cleaver to others working on CPMSA program evaluation, July 10, 2001, requesting help in publishing a three-year progress report on the CPMSA 22Exhibit No. 9: - 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. LRSD Notebook of Information onWritings on Program Evaluation-Literacy. PreK-3 Literacy Plan (with needs assessment, see pp. 12-26), June 1999 Memorandum to Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, June 24,1999, requesting their review of the proposed PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan Report on Level of ELLA training for K-2 teachers, May 10, 2000 Definition of Proficient for the Developmental Reading Assessment, K-2, May 2000 Report on Spring 2000 Developmental Reading Assessment, Percent At or Above Readiness Correlation StudyAmount of Training Hours and Student Achievement on the Developmental Reading Assessment, Spring 2000 Correlation StudyMultiple Comparisons of Effect of Four Approaches to Literacy Development, Spring 2000 Executive Summary, Title EElementary Literacy Program Evaluation, July 2000 Title I/Elementary Literacy Program Evaluation, August 2000 .. 10. Updated Draft of Title I/PreK-3 Literacy Plan Program Evaluation, December 2000 - 11. Progress Report on Elementary Literacy Plan to Board of Education, January 2001 ~ 12. Update on Implementation of the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan, June 2001, presented to Board of Education 13. Copies of slide presentation to Board of Education on PreK-3 Literacy Program, June 2001 14. E-mail to principals and Division of Instruction from Bonnie Lesley, June 29, 2001, attaching copies of the formal Update on Implementation of the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan to the Board of Education, plus the Highlights documents, and a copy of the presentation slides. 15. E-mail to elementary principals and other staff from Bonnie Lesley, June 29, 2001, attaching tables of DRA results by middle school feeder pattern. 2316. Evaluation of Success for All Programs, Little Rock School District, Year 1: 1997-98 by Steve Ross, Mary McNelis, Tracey Lewis, and Steve Loomis, University of Memphis 17. Evaluation of Success for All Program, Little Rock School District, Year 2: 1998-99 by Weipling Want and Steven Ross, University of Memphis, July 1999 18. Memorandum to elementary principals from Bonnie Lesley in Sept. 1, 1999, Learning Links, assigning supervision of the Success for All program in the Division of Instruction for greater effectiveness 19. Memorandum to Kathy Lease from Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 31,1999, attaching a copy of a contract for the evaluation of the Success for All program 20. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to selected SFA staff, Oct. 8, 1999, setting up training on Success for All 21. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to SFA principals, Nov. 11, 1999, providing to them copies of their contracts with the University of Memphis for SFA services 22. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to SFA principals, Nov. 15, 1999, providing them a study on SFA effectiveness\nattached article, Success for All: A Summary of Evaluations, by Jeanne Weiler, ERIC. 23. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected SFA principals, Aug. 8, 2000, suggesting that data analysis indicates SFA not being effective in their schools\nattached tables. 24. Report on Success for All Inservice activities, 1999-2000 School Year 25. Reports from eight-week assessments in Success for All schools, 1999-2000. 26. Success for All Implementation Report for December 1, 1999 (site visit reports from the University of Memphis that are done twice annually) 27. Success for All Implementation Reports for Spring 2001 (site visit reports from the University of Memphis that are done twice annually) 28. Executive Summary, English as a Second Language Program Evaluation, July 2000 29. English as a Second Language Program Evaluation (submitted to Office of Civil Rights), October 2000 24Exhibit No. 10: LRSD Notebook of Information onWritings on Program Evaluation-Mathematics/Science. 1. Proposal to National Science Foundation, Aug. 1, 1998, to fund Collaborative Partnerships in Mathematics and Science Achievement (see pp. 2-4 for needs assessment). 2. Management Plan for Year One, 1998-99, CPMSA (based on proposal for funding to the National Science Foundation. 3. 1999-2000 Strategic Plan, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 4. September 2000February 2002 Strategic Plan, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 5. September 1, 2000August 31, 2003 Strategic Plan, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 6. Revised Three-Year Strategic Plan, April 11, 2001, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 7. Annual Progress Report, 1998-99, submitted to the National Science Foundation. 8. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, May 20, 1999, with follow-up report to Site Visit of April 27-29, 1999. 9. Document prepared for December 3, 1999, Site Visit: Relationship of CPMSA Goals and LRSD Quality Indicators 10. Agenda forNSF Site Visit, December 3, 1999 11. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, January 24, 2000, with follow-up report to Site Visit of December 1-3, 1999. 12. Annual Progress Report, 1999-2000, submitted to the National Science Foundation. 13. Copy of slide presentation to the National Science Foundation Site Visit team, December 1-3, 1999. 14. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, January 16, 2001, with follow-up report to Site Visit of December 6-8, 2000. 15. Copy of slide presentation to Board of Education relating to CPMSA progress, January 2001. 2516. Copy of slide presentation to the National Science Foundation Midpoint Review (reverse site visit) in Washington, DC, February 5, 2001. 17. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, March 15, 2001, with follow-up report on Midpoint Review presentation in Washington, DC (reverse site visit) of February 5, 2001. 18. Systemic Initiatives Core Data Elements, 1998-99: Results for Little Rock, report submitted to the National Science Foundation relating to implementation of new mathematics/science programs 19. Systemic Initiatives Core Data Elements, 1999-2000: Results for Little Rock, report submitted to the National Science Foundation relating to implementation of new mathematics/science programs 20. Program EvaluationSigns of Success: Trends in Mathematics and Science Student Performance, 1997-98 and 1999-2000, report submitted by CPMSA Program Evaluator to project staff. 21. Program EvaluationBenchmark ExaminationOpen Response Mathematics Items: Student Outcomes of a Targeted Initiative with 4* Grade Students, 1998- 99. 22. Program EvaluationACTAAP Benchmark Examination Mathematics Results, Grades 4 and 8, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 23. Program EvaluationDistrict Criterion Referenced Tests (CRTs), Higher-Level Mathematics and Science, 3\"^ Quarter, 2000-01 24. Program EvaluationStanford Achievement Test, 9*'' Edition, Mathematics Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 25. Program EvaluationStanford Achievement Test, O* Edition, Science Reasoning Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 26. Program EvaluationAdvanced Placement Test: Mathematics Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 27. Program EvaluationAdvanced Placement Test: Science Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 28. Program EvaluationAmerican College Test Results for 8* Grade EXPLORE, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 2629. Program EvaluationAmerican College Test Results for 10* Grade PLAN, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 30. Program EvaluationAmerican College Test Results for 12* Grade ACT Test, 1997-9810 2000-01. 31. Program EvaluationComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement: Tabulated Indicators for Systemic Changes, 1997-98 to 2000-01, Part I: Graduation Data Summary and SEM Proficiency by Ethnicity. 32. Program EvaluationComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement: Tabulated Indicators for Systemic Changes, 1997-98 to 2000-01, Part II: Enrollment by Grade Level and Ethnicity. 33. Program EvaluationComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement: Tabulated Indicators for Systemic Changes, 1997-98 to 2001-02: Qualitative Indicators. 34. Program EvaluationComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement: Tabulated Indicators for Systemic Changes, 1997-98 to 2000-01: Part 4: Higher Level Mathematics and Science Course Enrollment and Successful Completion. 35. Program EvaluationSMART (Summer Advanced Mathematics Readiness Training), 1999 and 2000. 36. Program EvaluationAfter School Science Club, 1999 and 2000. 37. Executive Summary, CPMSA (Collaborative Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement) Program Evaluation conducted by PRE, July 2000 38. CPMSA Program Evaluation conducted by PRE, August 2000 39. Updated draft of CPMSA Program Evaluation by John Nunnery, Feb. 26, 2001 40. Final Draft of CPMSA Program Evaluation by John Nunnery, July 2001 41. Grant Proposal to the National Science Foundation for supplemental funding relating to the implementation of the CPMSA projectLittle Rock Center of Excellence for Research, Teaching, and Learning (CERTL), October 1, 1998 42. LRSD Mathematics and Science Mini-Grant Application for 2001-02 to provide funds to schools to accelerate their implementation of the CPMSA project 43. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA team, Dec. 11,2000, praising them for their preparation and performance at the NSF Site Visit 2744. E-mail exchange with Bormie Lesley and Vanessa Cleaver relating to need for data to evaluate SECME program, Feb. 16,2001 45. E-mail ffom/to Vanessa Cleaver and Bonnie Lesley, Feb. 21-Mar. 22, 2001, relating to needs to expand SMART program for Algebra I Readiness 46. Agendas for Advisory Committee/Goveming Committee/Steering Committee, September 1998May 15, 2001 47. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to elementary principals and other staff, April 11, 2001\nattached Validation Study on Investigations in Number, Data, and Space (elementary mathematics curriculum)\ncontains achievement data for districts around the country\nattached paper. 48. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to elementary principals and other staff, April 25, 2001, providing information on the relationship between participation in professional development and student achievement\nattached bar graph. 49. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to elementary principals and other staff, April 25, 2001, attaching a summary of a large scale study by the Miliken Family Foundation that links classroom practices to student achievement in mathematics. 50. E-mail from/to Bonnie Lesley and Eddie McCoy, Apr. 26, 2001, relating to an item analysis of SAT9 results that Ms. McCoy volunteered to do for the CPMSA program evaluation team 51. SAT9 item analysis for grades 5 and 7mathematics, completed by Eddie McCoy in June 2001. Exhibit No. 11: LRSD Notebook of Information on Writings on Program Evaluation-Other. 1. Executive Summary, Middle School Transition Program Evaluation, July 2000 2. Middle School Transition Program Evaluation, August 2000 3. Memorandum to Brenda James (Mann principal) from Bonnie Lesley, March 1, 1999, in response to their request to waive the implementation of new middle school curriculum and processes\nincludes evaluation concerns 4. Request for Waiver from the LRSD middle school curriculum for 2001-02 from Mann Middle School 285. 6. 7. 8. 9. Letter from Doima Creer to Bormie Lesley, Mar. 23, 2001, requesting her to attend the April 10, 2001, meeting of the MRC relating to discuss of Mann Middle Schools request for waiver. Letter to Donna Creer, MRC Executive Director, from Bonnie Lesley, March 28, 2001, evaluating Mann Middle Schools performance under the waiver that had been approved and recommending that the waiver not be granted for 2001-02 Letter from Donna Creer to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 11, 2001, providing follow-up to the Magnet Review Committee meeting of April 10, 2001 relating to Mann Middle Schools request for waiver. Letter to Jim Fullerton (Mann Middle School principal), April 16, 2001, from Les Camine, Sadie Mitchell, Marian Lacey, and Bonnie Lesley denying Manns request for waiver for 2001-02 from the LRSD curriculum. Memorandum from Marian Lacey to Jim Fullerton, May 16, 2001, encouraging Mann Middle School to collaboratively plan for the conection of the decline in reading and language arts performance. 10. E-mail to Jim Fullerton from Bonnie Lesley, May 23, 2001, with recommendations for Mann Middle Schools curriculum and efforts to narrow the achievement gap 11. E-mail from Jim Fullerton to Bonnie Lesley, June 5, 2001, inviting her to a meeting to discuss changes at Mann Middle School relating to narrowing the achievement gap 12. Sample letter to parents from Mann Middle School, Aug. 1, 2001, to set up a program devoted to the academic improvement of the lowest achieving sixth grade students. 13. Memorandum to curriculum staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 27, 1998, assigning duties related to the Talent Development Plan to improve access and success in AP courses\nattached planning strands with notes from meeting. 14. LRSD AP and Pre-AP Professional Development Course Survey Results (study on training experienced by AP and Pre-AP teachers conducted by Mable Donaldson to guide decision-making related to professional development plan for these teachers). 15. Memorandum in April 12, 2000, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley to high school principals, cabinet, and Division of Instruction including analysis of Status of Enrollment in Advanced Placement and Pre-Advanced Placement Courses\nTwo-Year Comparison of Advanced Placement Examination Participation and Scores' 2916. Evaluation of HIPPY Program: A Look at Outcomes for Children at the End of 3\"* Grade and 6'* Grade, July 1999, conducted by PRE 17. Site Visit Report from Arkansas HIPPY, Feb. 26, 2001. 18. Monitoring Reports provided to schools and the District by the Division of Child Care and Early Childhood Education (annual assessments) 19. Little Rock School District Technology Plan, 2001-2004, December 2000\nsee pp. 17-25 on evaluation of current status and see pp. 26-45 for program goals) 20. Inventory of Computers by School, Spring 2001 21. Priorities for LRSD Professional Development, 1999-2000 and 2000-01 22. Report to the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development relating to LRSDs participation in the Urban Professional Development InitiativeFirst Quarter Report, April 14, 1999\nincludes a plan for evaluation and baseline measures. 23. Memorandum to the Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, Feb. 22, 2001, requesting approval of the proposed professional development policy and regulations\nnote the emphasis on using student performance data to drive the program, on expectations for improved education achievement and equity of outcomes for all students, and on the need for program evaluation. 24. Vital Link: Passage to 00 25. Alternative Learning Environment (ALE) Program Evaluation\nTwo-Year Comparison: Lyceum Scholars High School (LSHS) 26. Program EvaluationPhilander Smith College/LRSD Lyceum Scholars High School, 1999-2000. 27. Summer School 2000 (final to be added upon completion) Exhibit No. 12: LRSD Notebook of Information on Writings on Program Evaluation-School District Improvement. 1. Document: Guidelines to School Improvement Planning, August 1999 (distributed to participants of summer 1999 Campus Leadership Team Institute)\nsee pp. 1-16 of using data for decision making and prioritizing\npp. 29-30 on Plan Evaluation.) 301. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum in Feb. 9, 2000, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley on conducting a formative evaluation of the progress on the School Improvement Plan with attached ERS research article: School Improvement: Factors Leading to Success or Failure Document of notes made by Bonnie Lesley in efforts to analyze the first ALT results in spring 2000, by school Memorandum in Dec. 16, 1998, Learning Links to principals from Bonnie Lesley establishing the waiver process, with attached application form, including a required evaluation design. Memorandum to Cabinet from Bonnie Lesley, Jan. 4, 1999, requesting feedback on a draft plan to restructure the Districts Title I program in order to align it with new literacy and mathematics curricula and Smart Start, as well as with the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Memorandum to elementary principals from Bonnie Lesley, June 9, 1999, clarifying Title I program issues and the importance of aligning Title 1 programs with efforts to improve achievement. Memorandum to Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 12, 1999, on issues relating to changes in the Districts Title I Plan for 1999-2000. Memorandum to John Walker, et al, from Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 1, 1999, relating to changes in the LRSD Title 1 Plan for 1999-2000\nattaching copy of the plan. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award to 1999 application for Level I Award, September 8, 1999 10. Planning document to write the application for the Arkansas Quality Award, prepared by Bonnie Lesley in April 2000 11. E-mail to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 26, 2000, thanking them for contributions to the writing of the application for the Arkansas Quality Award 12. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff. May 4, 2000, with attached copy of application to Arkansas Quality Award program 13. Application for the Arkansas Quality Award: Little Rock School District: Dedicated to Excellence, May 5, 2000 14. Agenda for planning meeting for Arkansas Quality Award site visit. August 14, 2000, with attachment, Arkansas Quality Award Application Procedure 15. Agenda for Arkansas Quality Award Site Visit, August 16-18, 2000 3116. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award after site visit on August 16-18, 2000. 17. Memorandum to Ann Brown and ODM Staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 4, 1999, in response to draft of their report. 18. Memorandum from Ann Brown to Bonnie Lesley, Oct. 15, 1999, in response to Aug. 4 memorandum. 19. Letter from Kathy Lease to N.W. Marshall at ODM, Oct. 11, 1999, stating concern that NCEs were used to make judgments in Achievement Disparity report. 20. Letter from N.W. Marshall to Kathy Lease, Oct. 22, 1999, in response to her concerns. 21. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to curriculum staff. May 10, 2000, with copy of feedback\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_304","title":"Compliance court orders","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":["2001-10/2001-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","School administrators"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance court orders"],"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/304"],"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\nRECEIVED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION NOV 13 2001 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. 4:82CV00866 SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS NOTICE OF DEPOSITION TO: Mr. Gene Jones Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at beginning at 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, November 14, 2001, at the law offices of Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP, 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000, Little Rock, Arkansas, that the undersigned will take the depositions upon oral examination of Gene Jones, Ann Marshall and Margie Powell, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure before a notary public or other officer duly authorized to administer oaths.You are notified to appear at such time and place and take part in the examination as you may be advised. Respectfully submitted, John C. Pendley, Jr. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 TEL: (501)376-2011 FAX: (501)376-2147 Attorneys for Plaintiff By: :ndley, Jr. F:\\HOME\\BBrown\\Fcndley\\LRS D\\desegrcgation'Dqx)Notk:e2.wpd -2- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing pleading has been served by facsimile and U.S. mail on this 9* day of November 2001 upon: Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Arm Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Sammye Taylor Office of the Atttomey General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Dr. Ken James Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72202 F \\HOME\\BBrown\\Fendky\\LRSD\\desegrcgation\\DepoNotice2 wpd -3- '. Fendley, Jr. AO 88 (Rey. 11/91) Subpoena in a Civil Case UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. 4:82CV00866 SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS TO: SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM MS. MARGIE POWELL Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear in the United States District Court at the place, date, and time specified below to testify in the above case. PLACE OF TESTIMONY COURTROOM DATE AND TIME [X] YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at the place, date and time specified below to testify at the taking of a deposition in the above case. PLACE OF DEPOSITION Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 DATE AND TIME Wednesday, November 14, 2001 1:00 p.m. (until completed) [X] YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce and permit inspection and copying of the following documents or objects at the place, date, and time specified below (list documents or objects): See the attached Exhibit A. PLACE Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 DATE AND TIME Wednesday, November 14, 2001 1:00 p.m. (until completed) I I YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit inspection of the following premises at the date and time specified below. PREMISES DATE AND TIME Any organization not a party to this suit that is subpoenaed for the taking of a deposition shall designate one or more officers, directors, or managing agents, or other persons who consent to testify on its behalf, and may set forth, for each person designated, the matters on which the person will testify. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 30(b)(6). ISSUING OFFICER SIGNATURE AND TITLE (INDICATE IF ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANT) , Attorney for Plaintiff DATE November 9, 2001ISSUING OFFICER'S NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER John C. Fendley, Jr. Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-2011 AO 88 (Rev. 11/91) Subpoena in a Civil Case (See Rule 45, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Parts C \u0026amp; D on Reverse) PROOF OF SERVICE DATE PLACE SERVED ON (PRINT NAME) SERVED BY (PRINT NAME) SERVED MANNER OF SERVICE TITLE DECLARATION OF SERVER I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing information contained in the Proof of Service is true and correct. Executed on DATE SIGNATURE OF SERVER ADDRESS OF SERVER(Rule 45, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Parts C \u0026amp; D: (c) PROTECTION OF PERSONS SUBJECT TO SUBPOENAS. (0 A party or an attorney responsible for the issuance and service of a subpoena shall take responsible steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to that subpoena. The court on behalf of which the subpoena was issued shall enforce this duty and impose upon the party or attorney in breach of this duty an appropriate sanction, which may include, but is not limited to, lost earnings and a reasonable attorney's fee. axA) A person commanded to produce and permit inspection and copying of designated books, papers, documents or tangible things, or inspection of premises need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless commanded to appear for deposition, hearing or trial. (B) Subject to paragraph (dX2) of this rule, a person commanded to produce and permit inspection and copying may, within 14 days after service of the subpoena or before the time specified for compliance if such time is less than 14 days after service, serve upon the party or attorney designated in the subpoena written objection to inspection or copying of any or all of the designated materials or of the premises. If objection is made, the party serving the subpoena shall not be entitled to inspect and copy the materials or inspect the premises except pursuant to an order of the court by which the subpoena was issued. If objection has been made, the party serving the subpoena may, upon notice to the person commanded to produce, move at any time for an order to compel the production. Such an order to compel production shall protect any person who is not a party or an officer of a party from signiflcant expense resulting from the inspection and copying commanded. (3XA) On timely motion, the court by which a subpoena was issued shall quash or modify the subpoena if it 0) (ii) fails to allow reasonable time for compliance\nrequires a person who is not a party or an officer of a party to travel to a place more than 100 miles from the place where that person resides, is employed or regularly transacts business In person, except that, subject to (B) (Hi) (iv) If a subpoena (0 (ii) the provisions of clause (cX3XBXiii) of this rule, such a person may in order to attend trial be commanded to travel from any such place within the state in which the trial is held, or requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter and no exception or waiver applies, or subjects a person to undue burden. requires disclosure of a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information, or requires disclosure of an unretained expert's opinion or information not describing specific events or occurrences in dispute and resulting from the expert's study made not at the request of any party, or (iii) requires a person who is not a party or an offlcer of a party to incur substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial, the court may, to protect a person subject to or affected by the subpoena, quash or modify the subpoena or, if the party in whose behalf the subpoena is issued shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship and assures that the person to whom the subpoena is addressed will be reasonably compensated, the court may order appearance or production only upon specified conditions. (d) DUTIES IN RESPONDING TO SUBPOENA. (1) correspond with the categories in the demand. A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents shall produce them as they are kept in the usual course of business or shall organize and label them to (2) When information subject to a subpoena is withheld on a claim that is privileged or subject to protection as trial preparation materials, the claim shall be made expressly and shall be supported by a description of the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced that is sufficient to enable the demanding party to contest the claim.Exhibit \"A' II Please produce the following: All documents pertaining to communications between the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and Judge Susan Webber Wright or her law clerks pertaining to LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and/or LRSD's compliance therewith from January 21, 1998, to the present, not previously made available to the parties in this case. Incorporating the definitions set forth below, the documents to be produced include, but are not limited to, notes of any meetings between anyone from ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright, briefing documents prepared by anyone from ODM for Judge Susan Webber Wright, calendar entries which reflect the dates and times of meetings between employees of ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright\nany email communications between the ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright and any other documents in any form which reflect the substance of communications between the ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright which have not been previously made available to the parties in this case. Definitions \"Document\" shall mean any original written, typewritten, handwritten, printed or electronically recorded material, as well as all tapes, disks, non-duplicate copies and transcripts thereof, now or at any time in your possession, custody or control\nand, without limiting the generality of the foregoing definition, but for the purposes of illustration only, \"document\" includes notes, correspondence, memoranda, business records (stored electronically or otherwise), e-mails, diaries, calendars, address and telephone records, photographs, tape recordings and videotapes. \"Pertaining to \" shall mea n constituting, embodying, arising out of, incident to, referring to, mentioned, bearing upon, reflecting, evidencing, affecting, concerning, providing evidence for, or relating to the transaction, individual, entity, act, object, conference, contention, communication, allegation or activity identified. \"Communication \" shall mean every manner or means of disclosure, transfer or exchange, and every disclosure, transfer or exchange of information whether orally or by document or whether face to face, by telephone, U.S. mail, e-mail, personal delivery, or otherwise. \"Office of Desegregation Monitoring\" or \"ODM\" shall include all persons employed by or otherwise working on behalf of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas.AO 8S (Rev. 11/91) Subpoena in a Civil Case UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL NO. 4:82CV00866 SWW__*_ RECEIVED NOV 1 3 ?001 DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL UlTlbL u. DESEGREGATION MONITOm INTERVENORS SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM TO: MS. ANN MARSHALL Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear in the United States District Court at the place, date, and time specified below to testify in the above case. PLACE OF TESTIMONY COURTROOM DATE AND TIME [X] YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at the place, date and time specified below to testify at the taking of a deposition in the above case. PLACE OF DEPOSITION Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 DATE AND TIME Wednesday, November 14, 2001 9:00 a.m. (until completed) [XI YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce and permit inspection and copying of the following documents or objects at the place, date, and time specified below (list documents or objects): See the attached Exhibit A. PLACE Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 DATE AND TIME Wednesday, November 14, 2001 9:00 a.m. (until completed)  YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit inspection of the following premises at the date and time specified below. PREMISES DATE AND TIME Any organization not a party to this suit that is subpoenaed for the taking of a deposition shall designate one or more officers, directors, or managing agents, or other persons who consent to testify on its behalf, and may set forth, for each person designated, the matters on which the person will testify. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 30(b)(6). ISSUING OFFICER SIGNATURE AND TITLE (INDICATE IF ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANT) , Attorney for Plaintiff DATE November 9, 2001ISSUING OFFICER'S NAME. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER John C. Fendley, Jr. Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-2011 AO 88 (Rev. 11Z9I) Subpoena in a Civil Case (See Rule 45. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Parts C \u0026amp; D on Reverse) PROOF OF SERVICE DATE PLACE SERVED ON (PRINT NAME) SERVED BY (PRINT NAME) SERVED MANNER OF SERVICE TITLE DECLARATION OF SERVER I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing information contained in the Proof of Service is true and correct. Executed on DATE SIGNATURE OF SERVER ADDRESS OF SERVERRule 45, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Parts C \u0026amp; D: (c) PROTECTION OF PERSONS SUBJECT TO SUBPOENAS. (1) A party or an attorney responsible for the issuance and service of a subpoena shall take responsible steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to that subpoena. The court on behalf of which the subpoena was issued shall enforce this duty and impose upon the party or attorney in breach of this duty an appropriate sanction, which may include, but is not limited to, lost earnings and a reasonable attorney's fee. (2XA) A person commanded to produce and permit inspection and copying of designated books, papers, documents or tangible things, or inspection of premises need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless commanded to appear for deposition, hearing or trial. (B) Subject to paragraph (dX2) of this rule, a person commanded to produce and permit inspection and copying may, within 14 days after service of the subpoena or before the time specifled for compliance if such time is less than 14 days after service, serve upon the party or attorney designated in the subpoena written objection to inspection or copying of any or all of the designated materials or of the premises. If objection is made, the party serving the subpoena shall not be entitled to inspect and copy the materials or inspect the premises except pursuant to an order of the court by which the subpoena was issued. If objection has been made, the party serving the subpoena may, upon notice to the person commanded to produce, move at any time for an order to compel the production. Such an order to compel production shall protect any person who is not a party or an officer of a party from significant expense resulting from the inspection and copying commanded. (3XA) On timely motion, the court by which a subpoena was issued shall quash or modify the subpoena if It (I) () fails to allow reasonable time for compliance\nrequires a person who is not a party or an officer of a party to travel to a place more than 100 miles from the place where that person resides, is employed or regularly transacts business in person, except that, subject to (B) (iii) (iv) If a subpoena (I) 00 the provisions of clause (cXJXBXUO of this rule, such a person may in order to attend trial be commanded to travel from any such place within the state in which the trial is held, or requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter and no exception or waiver applies, or subjects a person to undue burden. requires disclosure of a trade secret or other confldential research, development, or commercial information, or requires disclosure of an unretained expert's opinion or information not describing specific events or occurrences in dispute and resulting from the expert's study made not at the request of any party, or (iii) requires a person who is not a party or an officer of a party to Incur substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to attend trial, the court may. to protect a person subject to or affected by the subpoena, quash or modify the subpoena or, if the party in whose behalf the subpoena is issued shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be otherwise met without undue hardship and assures that the person to whom the subpoena is addressed will be reasonably compensated, the court may order appearance or production only upon specified conditions. (d) DUTIES IN RESPONDING TO SUBPOENA. (1) correspond with the categories in the demand. A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents shall produce them as they are kept io the usual course of business or shall organize and label them to (2) When information subject to a subpoena is withheld on a claim that is privileged or subject to protection as trial preparation materials, the claim shall be made expressly and shall be supported by a description of the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced that is sufficient to enable the demanding party to contest the claim.Exhibit \"A\" Please produce the following: All documents pertaining to communications between the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and Judge Susan Webber Wright or her law clerks pertaining to LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and/or LRSD's compliance therewith from January 21, 1998, to the present, not previously made available to the parties in this case. Incorporating the definitions set forth below, the documents to be produced include, but are not limited to, notes of any meetings between anyone from ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright, briefing documents prepared by anyone from ODM for Judge Susan Webber Wright, calendar entries which reflect the dates and times of meetings between employees of ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright\nany email communications between the ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright and any other documents in any form which reflect the substance of communications between the ODM and Judge Susan Webber Wright which have not been previously made available to the parties in this case. Definitions \"Document\" shall mean any original written, typewritten, handwritten, printed or electronically recorded material, as well as all tapes, disks, non-duplicate copies and transcripts thereof, now or at any time in your possession, custody or control\nand, without limiting the generality of the foregoing definition, but for the purposes of illustration only, \"document\" includes notes, correspondence, memoranda, business records (stored electronically or otherwise), e-mails, diaries, calendars, address and telephone records, photographs, tape recordings and videotapes. \"Pertaining to\" shall mea n constituting, embodying, arising out of, incident to, referring to, mentioned, bearing upon, reflecting, evidencing, affecting, concerning, providing evidence for, or relating to the transaction, individual, entity, act, object, conference, contention, communication, allegation or activity identified. \"Communication \" shall mean every manner or means of disclosure, transfer or exchange, and every disclosure, transfer or exchange of information whether orally or by document or whether face to face, by telephone, U.S. mail, e-mail, personal delivery, or otherwise. \"Office of Desegregation Monitoring\" or \"ODM\" shall include all persons employed by or otherwise working on behalf of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas.G. Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1922-1994) WILLIAM H. SUTTON, P A. BYRON M. EISEMAN, JR., P.A. JOE D. BELL, P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRY, P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY, P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS. JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON, P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM HI. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR., P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM, P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON, P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON, P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL Ill. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. F A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR. P.A JOSEPH B HURST. JR., P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P A. ROBERT S. SHAPER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN HI. P.A. MICKAEL S. MOORE. P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III, P.A. KEVIN A. CRASS. P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL, JR., P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER, P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH, JR , P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER, JR., P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT, P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. GUY ALTON WADE. P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER, P.A. TONIA P. JONES, P.A. DAVID D. WILSON. P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.fridayfirm.com 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 3425 NORTH FUTRALL DRIVE, SUITE 103 FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72703-4811 TELEPHONE 501-885-2011 FAX 501-695-2147 JEFFREY H. MOORE. P.A. DAVID M. GRAF, P.A. CARLA GUNNELS SPAINHOUR. P.A. JOHN C. FENDLEY, JR.. P.A. JONANN ELIZABETH CONIGLIO. P.A. R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON. P.A. GREGORY D. TAYLOR, P.A. TONY L. WILCOX. P.A. FRAN C. HICKMAN, P.A. BETTY J DEMORY, P.A. LYNDA M. JOHNSON, P.A. JAMES W. SMITH. P.A. CLIFFORD W. PLUNKETT. P.A. DANIEL L. HERRINGTON, P.A. MARVIN L. CHILDERS K. COLEMAN WESTBROOK, JR. ALLISON J. CORNWELL ELLEN M. OWENS JASON B. HENDREN BRUCE B. TIDWELL MICHAEL E, KARNEY KELLY MURPHY MCQUEEN JOSEPH P. MCKAY ALEXANDRA A. IFRAH JAY T. TAYLOR MARTIN A. KASTEN BRYAN W. DUKE JOSEPH G. NICHOLS ROBERT T. SMITH RYAN A. BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KAREN S. HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON PHILIP B. MONTGOMERY KRISTEN S. RIGGINS ALANG. BRYAN OF COUNSEL B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR. H.T. LARZELERE, P.A. JOHN C, ECHOLS. P.A. A D- MCALLISTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2898 FAX 870-762-2918 November 9, 2001 CHRISTOPHER HELLER LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-1508 FAX 501-244-5344 hellerQfec.nat HAND DELIVERED Ms. Aim Marshall Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza RECEIVED NOV 2001 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 OffICEOf DESESREGmMOIOyHG Re: ODM Depositions Dear Ann: Please find enclosed copies of our Motion in Limine and Brief, which were filed today, as well as Deposition Notices and Subpoenas for yourself and members of your staff. As you can see from our Motion in Limine, we believe that the people in your office should not be allowed to testify in this proceeding. The purpose of the depositions is not to learn what a particular witnesses testimony might be in court, but only to determine whether the court has received extra-judicial information on the merits of the case from the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. We believe we are required to investigate the possibility of extra-judicial communications on the merits of this case before the hearing continues on November 19, 2001. We therefore have little flexibility in the scheduling of the depositions but, if Tuesday or Thursday would be more convenient for you than Wednesday, we would be amenable to rescheduling for one of those days. Finally, please let me know whether you will accept service of the enclosed subpoenas or if it will be necessary for us to secure service in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.RECEIVED KOV ' 2001 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION QiRGtOfr LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. 4:82CV00866 SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS TO: NOTICE OF DEPOSITION Mr. Gene Jones Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 1 Ms. Ann Marshall Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at beginning at 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, November 14, 2001, at the law offices of Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, LLP, 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000, Little Rock, Arkansas, that the undersigned will take the depositions upon oral examination of Gene Jones, Ann Marshall and Margie Powell, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure before a notary public or other officer duly authorized to administer oaths.You are notified to appear at such time and place and take part in the examination as you may be advised. Respectfully submitted, John C. Pendley, Jr. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 TEL: (501)376-2011 FAX: (501)376-2147 Attorneys for Plaintiff By\nC. Fendley, Jr. 4- F:\\HOME\\BBrown\\Fendley\\LRSD\\dcsegrcgalion\\DepoNotice2 wpd -2- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing pleading has been served by facsimile and U.S. mail on this 9* day of November 2001 upon: Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Sammye Taylor Office of the Atttomey General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 P.O. Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Dr. Ken James Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72202 Jl C. Fendley, Jr. F:\\HOME\\BBrown\\Fcndley\\LRSD\\desegregation\\DepoNotice2.wpd -3- IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS MEMORANDUM BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT TESTIMONY BY OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING The ODM was created under the courts inherent equitable powers, at the direction of the Eighth Circuit, to replace the Office of Metropolitan Supervisor. Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 921 F.2d 1371, 1394 (8th Cir. 1990). The purpose of the ODM is to function as an \"agent\" of the court for the ongoing \"supervision or monitoring\" of the settlement agreement. Id. at 1386,1388. Indeed, the Eighth Circuit has made clear that the ODMs monitoring of the parties compliance with the settlement agreement is equivalent to monitoring by the court itself under its retained jurisdiction to oversee implementation of the settlement agreement. Id. at 1390\ncompare Jenkins v. State of Missouri, 890 F.2d 65, 67-68 (8th Cir. 1989) (noting that the creation of a desegregation monitoring committee at the remedial stage was within the courts inherent equitable powers). The only intimation of a testimonial role for the ODM in the opinions of the Eighth Circuit is with regard to its budgetary process. In Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 971 F.2d 160, 166 (8th Cir. 1992), the Eighth Circuit held that the parties wereentitled to review the ODMs proposed budget and to submit recommendations and objections to the court. The Eighth Circuit noted that there might be \"rare occasions when issues are of such importance that an evidentiary hearing is required,\" id., but such a hearing clearly would be limited to issues involving the budgetary needs of the ODM and the allocation of its funds. Since its creation, the ODMs primary function has been to monitor the school districts progress in meeting the requirements of the settlement agreement. See Order entered 1/18/91, Docket No. 1418 (vesting the ODM with the authority \"to monitor the school districts compliance with the settlement plans and settlement agreement\"). The ODM discharges this obligation through periodic reports to the court and the parties, typically drawing upon statistical and other information provided by the school districts. The ODM also facilitates collaboration among the parties by serving as a conduit for informal communication and information-sharing. See Order entered 10/24/94, Docket No. 2319 (charging the ODM with \"coordinating among the parties the plan modification process\" for a proposed change in the Desegregation Facilitators title and duties)\nand Order entered 12/27/96, docket No. 2901 (authorizing the ODM to \"participate in negotiations as a facilitator\" with regard to proposed modifications to the LRSD desegregation plan). The ODMs collaborative function was given formal expression in Section 8.2.4 of the LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, dated January 16, 1998, which requires the ODM to attempt to facilitate agreement between the LRSD and a party seeking to resolve a compliance issue. The ODM cannot fulfill its functions of encouraging collaboration among the parties or facilitating agreement on compliance issues if it adopts a partisan position or is perceived as partisan. If the members of the ODM are called to testify, then the parties have a fundamental right to cross-examine them. See Reilly v. United States, 863 F.2d 149, 159 (1st Cir. 1988) (noting that 2the parties had no right to cross-examine a technical advisor appointed by the court, provided that 'the advisor was not an evidentiary source\"). Likewise, making reports available to the parties regarding the ODM witnesses findings and allowing depositions in advance of the hearing would be important procedural safeguards. Id. at 156 (noting that depositions and cross-questioning are inapposite if a court advisor makes no findings and supplies no evidence)\ncompare PRE 706(a) (setting procedural requirements for expert witnesses appointed by the court, including advising the parties of the witness findings, submitting to depositions, and being subject to cross-examination by each party, including the party calling the witness). Indeed, due process requires an evidentiary hearing before evidence supplied by the ODM or any other source may become the basis for findings of fact by the court. JuanF.v. lPe/cA:er, 37 F.3d 874, 880(2d Cir. 1994)\n^A:er5 v. Ohio Department of Liquor Control, 902 F.2d 477, 479 (6th Cir. 1990). The LRSD will be at a significant disadvantage if it opposes the ODM witnesses testimony. yet it appears to have no other option. The Federal Monitor has already stated publicly that the LRSD \"is not ready for unitary status.\" Such a statement lies near the heart of the ultimate issue and cannot go unreported or unchallenged if the ODM becomes an evidentiary source at all. Since the Federal Monitor is an appointee of the court, not as an expert witness or technical advisor, but as an agent for \"supervision or monitoring,\" Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 921 F.2d at 1388, to oppose the Federal Monitor is very nearly to oppose the court itself. The ODM has further been clothed with neutrality by a decade of experience in interacting with the court and with the parties on an impartial basis. It is not to be expected that the court can impartially weigh a conflict in the evidence between its own agent and the LRSDs witnesses. Therefore, the ODM must be strictly circumscribed to its non-partisan, non-testimonial role. See In re Kansas City 3Star Co., 73 F.3d 191,193,196 (Sth Cir. 1996) (noting that a desegregation monitoring committee was an II arm of the court\" whose authority \"must be strictly monitored and carefully tailored to match the requirements of its mission\"). Finally, the change in the ODMs role from monitor to witness, which was alluded to by the court at the hearing on June 29,2001 and which has been raised formally by the Joshua Intervenors decision to name three ODM members as witnesses, raises serious questions concerning the courts impartiality. In Edgar v. K.L., 93 F.3d 256 (7th Cir. 1996), the Seventh Circuit disqualified a district judge in litigation challenging the constitutionality of the Illinois mental health system. The Seventh Circuit found that at least one ex parte meeting between the court and the members of a court- appointed panel of mental health experts had addressed the merits of the case. The Court noted that the \"discussions in chambers were calculated, material, and wholly unnecessary\" and that two members of the panel had become partisan by their public criticisms of the states mental health system. 93 F.3d at 259-260\ncompare Association of Mexican-American Educators v. State of California, 231 F.3d 572,591 (9th Cir. 2000) (finding no evidence that the district court relied upon a court-appointed technical advisor as \"a source of evidence\")\nand Liddell v. Board of Education of City of St. Louis, 105 F.3d 1208, 1211-1212 (Sth Cir. 1997) (noting a ruling by the district court that court-ordered negotiations between a settlement coordinator and the parties \"would be confidential from the court and outside parties\" and that the coordinator \"would not recommend to the court how the case should be resolved\"). The district judge in Edgar v. K.L. was disqualified on the basis of 28 U.S.C.  455(a) and (b)(1), which requires disqualification when the impartiality of the court might reasonably be questioned, or when the court has acquired personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts, respectively, and Canon 3A(4) of the Code of Conduct for United States 4Judges, which prohibits a judge from considering ex parte communications on the merits or on procedures affecting the merits. 175 F.R.D. 363, 367 (1998). CONCLUSION The LRSD seeks only an impartial hearing on its request for recognition of its achievements in complying with its desegregation obligations and its attainment of unitary status. Such a hearing cannot be had in fairness to the LRSD if the historic role of the ODM is now changed from that of a monitor and facilitator to that of a material adverse witness. For this reason, and for the reasons set forth above, the LRSD requests the court to prohibit testimony by the ODM at the hearing on the LRSDs request for unitary status. Respectfully submitted. Little Rock School District, Robert S. Shafer Christopher Heller and John C. Fendley, Jr. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501)376-2011 By- TSt^her Helie^j^^^^NA 81083 5CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following persons by mail on November 9, 2001: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Post Office Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 Ms. Ann Marshall (Hand Delivered) Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Hagameier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller F:\\HOME\\BRENDAK\\lrsd\\deseg-mcmorandum wpd 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION NOV/ J ?00l LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS MOTION IN LIMINE TO PROHIBIT TESTIMONY BY OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Comes the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), by its undersigned attorneys, and for its motion in limine to prohibit testimony by the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"ODM\"), states: 1. Counsel for the Joshua Intervenors has given notice that three members of the ODM will be called as witnesses for the Intervenors at the hearing on unitary status. 2. The ODM was created as an arm of the court for the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the settlement agreement. Pursuant to that purpose, the ODM (i) operates under a budget approved by the court and subject to the courts broad discretion, (ii) has access to school district personnel and to information concerning the school districts, (iii) reports to the court and to the parties regarding progress with the requirements of the Districts desegregation plans, (iv) serves a collaborative function in identifying and facilitating discussion among the parties with regard to desegregation remedies, and (v) facilitates agreement between the Joshua Intervenors and the LRSD with regard to compliance issues under the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 3. It is contrary to the purpose and function of the ODM for its members to testify as witnesses on adversarial issues between the parties, particularly the issue of unitary status. Testimony by ODM members regarding the factual predicates for unitary status will be perceived as either hostile or favorable to particular parties. It will be the duty of counsel to cross-examine the ODM witnesses for bias or impeachment. In short, appearing as a witness on the issue of unitary status is contrary to the ODMs long-standing and historic function as an agent of the court and destructive of its collaborative and facilitating role with the parties. 4. If the members of the ODM are permitted to appear as witnesses on the issue of unitary status, then the LRSD has a due process right, supported by Rule 706(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence (\"FRE\"), to depose them with regard to their expected testimony and to cross-examine them at the hearing. The LRSD will be entitled to explore (i) whether the ODM witnesses have formed conclusions or opinions regarding the LRSDs request for unitary status, (ii) the basis for those conclusions or opinions, and (iii) the witnesses credibility. 5. The issue of credibility will place the parties in the untenable and unfair position of asking the court to disbelieve witnesses who (i) represent the remedial arm of the court itself, and (ii) have had more than a decade of experience in working with the court and the parties in the role of monitor and facilitator. The working relationship over that period of time includes numerous ex parte contacts between the ODM and the court. 6. The court stated at the hearing held on June 29, 2001 (i) that counsel for the Joshua Intervenors was free to call the members of the ODM as witnesses \"to the extent ... they have knowledge on the matters at issue,\" and (ii) that the court had spoken informally with an ODM staff member and that the court had no objection to such member sharing with the parties \"the information she has.\" (Transcript of 6/29/01 Hearing, 27-28) These statements by the court necessarily indicate a belief that the ODM has evidence which is relevant to the issue of unitary status and that is not 2merely cumulative of evidence that may be presented independently by the parties. 7. The LRSD is aware of a recent statement by the Federal Monitor in a public forum to the effect that the LRSD \"is not ready for unitary status.\" This circumstance indicates that the Federal Monitor (i) has formed an opinion or conclusion that is not strictly within the ODMs charge to act as a monitor for the court and a facilitator for the parties, and (ii) has aligned herself publicly and to a significant degree with the position of the Joshua Intervenors on the issue of unitary status. 8. Independently of the ODM witnesses testimony on the merits, it is material to the LRSDs case whether the ODM and the court have had ex parte discussions on the issue of unitary status or related issues. If such discussions have occurred, issues arise concerning (i) whether the court has acquired personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts, within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.  455(b)(1), (ii) whether the impartiality of the court might reasonably be questioned, within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.  455(a), and (iii) whether the court has considered ex parte communications on the merits or on procedures affecting the merits, within the meaning of Canon 3A(4) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. 9. The LRSD reserves it right to investigate whether there have been ex parte communications between the ODM and the court on any and all matters affecting the LRSDs right to an impartial hearing on its request for unitary status, and if so, to seek an appropriate remedy. WHEREFORE, the LRSD prays that the court prohibit testimony by members of the ODM at the hearing on the LRSDs request for unitary status, and for all other just and proper relief. 3Respectfully submitted, Little Rock School District, Robert S. Shafer Christopher Heller and John C. Fendley, Jr. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501)376-2011 Byf 'hristopher Heller, AR car No7 81083 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following persons by mail on November 9, 2001: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 11800 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 146 Post Office Box 17388 Little Rock, Arkansas 72222-7388 4Ms. Ann Marshall (Hand Delivered) Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Hagameier Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller F:\\HOME\\BRENDAK\\lnd\\dcscg-motion in limine, wpd 5 FILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NOV 14 2001 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JAMES By\n___: ! W. McCqRMACK, CLEF CLERK sw LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. Let al.. Defendants, MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al.. Intervenors. * * * * * *   * * * * * No. 4:82CV00866 SWW RECEIVED NOV 16 200! Office OF OESEGREGOiMQSRGftijia ORDER Now before the Court is the motion of the Little Rock School District to compel responses by Joshua Intervenors to LRSDs first set of interrogatories and requests for production, as well as Joshuas response. The Court previously addressed these discovery issues in relation to LRSDs second set of interrogatories and requests for production in the October 2, 2001 hearing on Joshuas motion for definition and clarification of the issues. For the same reasons set forth in that hearing, LRSDs motion to compel is hereby DENIED. LRSD is once again reminded that the hearings scheduled on November 19 and 20, 2001, concern Joshuas objections to the March 15, 2001 Compliance Report, in which the LRSD represented to the Court that the district had achieved unitary status. There is no reason to obfuscate the issue by complaining about Joshuas activities- Joshuas activities are not relevant unless such activities relate to the trustworthiness of evidence presented by Joshua. The Court looks forward to the LRSDs presenting evidence on November 19 and 20,2001, that the representations made in the Compliance Report are accurate and truthful, particularly as to the I 3^5 4 0issues of program evaluation and student discipline. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2001 THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 58 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP BY. 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION U.S OraTWCT COURT eastern district ARKANSAS NOV 1 4 2001 JAMES yv McCOHMACK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. l,etal.. Defendants, MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al.. Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al.. Intervenors. * * * * * * * * * * * * * By\nNo. 4:82CV00866 SWW NOV 16 21ISI ORDER On November 13, 2001, the Court held a hearing in this matter to address the Little Rock School Districts November 9, 2001, motion in limine to prohibit testimony by Office of Desegregation Monitoring. The Court received the Joshua Intervenors November 13, 2001, response in opposition and motion to quash the deposition subpoenas shortly before that hearing. On the basis of the motions and response, and the arguments made at the hearing, the Court issues the following Order consistent with the Courts rulings at the November 13,2001 hearing. The LRSD requests that the ODM monitors be excluded as witnesses on adversarial issues, particularly the issue of unitary status now before the Court. The LRSD further seeks to depose certain ODM monitors to investigate whether there have been ex parte communications between the ODM and the Court concerning LRSDs request for unitary status. The LRSDs motion in limine to exclude the ODM monitors as witnesses is hereby denied. The Court regards the ODM monitors as employees charged with assisting the Court in performing its monitoring function, as directed by the Court of Appeals. The ODM monitors 3 5 3 9 have testified in this case on several occasions,' and the Court has relied upon their written reports and their testimony in many rulings. Some of these reports have benefitted the LRSD, which has been released from monitoring in several areas. LRSD has never questioned the accuracy or thoroughness of any reports, and in the most recent hearings LRSD witnesses testified to the usefulness of these reports and that the recommendations in the report on discipline had been followed. In the eyes of the Court, the testimony of the ODM monitors concerning their monitoring activities and information derived therefrom does not differ from the ODMs published reports which may be entered into the record. The testimony is subject to cross examination and the reports are subject to challenge by the parties. Even though the ODM has served the Court extremely well in this case, the Court will not decide the pending motion for unitary status, or any other motion, on the basis of any opinions of the ODM monitors, none of whom are lawyers. While the ODM may work for the Court, and thus the Court may engage in ex parte communications with the ODM concerning monitoring duties, the Court does not rely on the ODM to assist the Court in finding the relevant law and deciding the districts compliance therewith. The Court assures the parties that it does not decide motions on the basis of conversations with the ODM monitors. The ODM monitors work for the Court but do not speak for it. Much like the Courts law clerk is charged with the special responsibilities of assisting the Court in ferreting out the applicable law and preparing orders and opinions in this case, the ODM is charged with the special responsibility of assisting 'By way of example, ODM personnel have previously testified in this case as follows: Ann Marshall, 01-21-92, 06-30-98\nMelissa Guldin, 01-23-92, 05-29-92, 03-29-93, 04-19-93, 01- 27-94\nBill Mooney, 06-23-95, 08-11-95\nBob Morgan, 12-18-91, 06-23-95\nMargie Powell, 03- 19-93, 04-19-93, 11-17-93, 01-26-94, 06-30-98\nHorace Smith, 01-22-92, 03-19-93, 04-19-93, 11-17-93\nConnie Tanner, 04-19-93, 06-09-93, 01-27-94. 2the Court in performing its monitoring duties. While the Court may rely on ODM to make recommendations to the parties as a result of its monitoring, the Court does not rely on ODM to make recommendations concerning the disposition of this case. The Court decides the motions in this case in light of the applicable law and solely upon the record in the case, which, in this hearing, may or may not depending on the parties decisions as to the evidence to be presented include the testimony of the ODM monitors and the ODMs reports. In the eleven years that this judge has presided in this case, no party before now has publicly accused the Court or the ODM of bias. In the interest of maintaining impartiality in this hotly contested matter, the Court directed the desegregation monitor to provide any information she had to both sides if she provided it to either side. The Court is well aware that any witness may be biased. If the ODM personnel testify in this case, they may be treated like any other witness, and the parties may impeach their testimony and/or demonstrate such bias if and when appropriate. The Court wishes to make clear that although the Court has engaged in ex parte communications with the ODM desegregation monitor concerning her monitoring duties, the Court is not relying on ODM-produced information on the student discipline and program evaluation issues now before the Court. If the ODM monitors might be called as witnesses, the LRSD may take their depositions as requested, and the Court would waive its privilege as to any information on student discipline and program evaluation provided the Court by ODM. As previously stated, the Court notes that it is not relying on the ODM in this proceeding- rather, the burden rests upon Joshua to demonstrate a failure in compliance by LRSD with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Although in this instance the ODM has published no report. 3the ODM may still have information pertinent to the issues before the Court. However, it is up to the parties, if they so desire, to elicit this information and to bring it before the Court as part of the record. The Court does not, and will not, seek out any such information independently. In conclusion, the LRSDs motion in limine is hereby DENIED\nand Joshuas motion to quash is also hereby DENIED. There is no need to obfuscate the issue before the Court by, this time, pointing a finger at the Court or the ODM. Once again, the Court must direct the LRSD to focus on presenting evidence that its representations made in the March 15, 2001 Compliance Report are accurate and truthful, particularly as to the issues of program evaluation and student discipline. The Court looks forward to hearing this evidence on November 19-20, 2001. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2001 hi: JUD UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 58 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ON .BY V\\ ?------------ 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS AFFIDAVIT OF DR. LINDA BROWN I, Linda Brown, after being duly sworn, state under oath: I am the Principal of Parkview Arts and Science Magnet High School in the Little Rock School District and have been since July, 1998. I am also a member of Trinity Episcopal Cathedral. I attended Trinity Episcopal Cathedrals annual meeting in January 2001 and heard Judge Susan Webber Wright address the meeting. I have read the February 9,2001 article in The Insider Section of the Arkansas Times Newspaper. That article acurately describes Judge Wrights remarks at Trinity Episcopal Cathedrals annual meeting. Further the affiant sayeth not. lown STATE OF ARKANSAS) ) SS. COUNTY OF PULASKI) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, on this ^U^ay of November, 2001. My Commission Expires: \u0026amp; sr EXHIBIT si RE^ ^'7.3 NOV 16 2001 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OFFICE 0. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS AFFIDAVIT OF DR. DON STEWART I, Don Stewart, after being duly sworn, state under oath: I am the Chief Financial Officer of the Little Rock School District and have been since February 2000. On January 16,1998, the Little Rock School District Board of Directors approved the Little Rock School Districts Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan was subsequently approved by the District Court. The Revised Plan states that the Little Rock School District would be declared unitary and released from federal court supervision at the end of the 2000-2001 school year if the District substantially complied with the terms of the Plan. Soon after the LRSD Board of Directors approved the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, the District established a Compliance Committee. I was a member of that Committee. The responsibility of the Committee was to assure the Districts compliance with the Revised Plan. The Committee developed a compliance plan and a compliance handbook and, with few exceptions, met on a weekly basis to determine the status of LRSDs compliance and to resolve any compliance issues. The Revised Desegregation and Education Plan required that LRSD report to the District Court the status of its compliance on March 15, 2001. The Compliance Committee was charged J exhibit f 1with the responsibility to prepare the required compliance report. During the time the Committee was in the process of preparing that report, I had a conversation with federal monitor Ann Marshall. Ms. Marshall expressed to me her belief that the Little Rock School District was not ready for unitary status because some aspects of the Districts operation needed further attention. Further the affiant sayeth not. STATE OF ARKANSAS) ) SS. COUNTY OF PULASKI) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, on this of November, 2001. 03 'Q. iires: F: \\H0ME\\BRENDAK\\lr8d\\des-affidavit-Stewart .wpd otary Public -2- (2^ /\\ioTARyV i ^esa^ fee'I IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS AFFIDAVIT OF BONNIE LESLEY I, Bonnie Lesley, after being duly sworn, state under oath: I am the Associate Superintendent for Instruction of the Little Rock School District and have been in this position since June 1998. Ann (Brown) Marshall has, over the past three years, been very helpful to me in my role both as an Associate Superintendent and as a member of the Compliance Team. She provided me with background information, history, and frequent advice. both substantive and process. In at least three conversations in the last several months, Ms. Marshall has expressed to me several opinions relating to the Districts position for unitary status. She told me that the three-year period of the plan was too short to accomplish all the necessary changes. She told me that the District might regret losing the protection of the federal court, especially as it relates to finances. And she most recently told me that she believed we should withdraw from our pursuit of unitary status and go back and \"do it right.\" When I asked her what she thought we had not done, she said. \"program evaluation - page 148.\" (I understood this to be a reference to page 148 of the March 2001 Compliance Report.) In this last conversation, it was my impression that she wanted me to relay that advice to my superintendent and to the attorneys, which I did. EXHIBIT IFurther the affiant sayeth not. ,esle\nSTATE OF ARKANSAS) ) SS. COUNTY OF PULASKI) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, on this of November, 2001. Notary Public My Commi^jsjPft^xpires: X X **nnH*** F:\\HOME\\BRENDAK\\lrsd\\des-affidavit-lesley.wpd -2-RECEIVtu IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION NOV16Z001 QfDKOF OBtSRESROM**'* LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 4\n82CV00866SWW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS AFFIDAVIT OF SUE STRICKLAND I, Sue Strickland, after being duly sworn, state under oath: I am a member of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors and have been since September 1994. I have served as President, Vice President and Secretary of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. On January 16,1998, the Little Rock School District Board of Directors approved the Little Rock School Districts Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. LRSDs Revised Desegregation and Education Plan was subsequently approved by the District Court. The Revised Plan states that the Little Rock School District would be declared unitary and released from federal court supervision at the end of the 2000-2001 school year if the District substantially complied with the terms of the Plan. The Revised Desegregation and Education Plan required that the District file a report in the District Court on the status of its compliance with the Plan on March 15, 2001. During the time LRSD was preparing the report which would show that the District had substantially complied with its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, I had a conversation with federal monitor Ann Marshall. She told me that I should not let our Superintendent, Dr.^ Les Camine, pursue unitary status because the District was not ready for it and if we tried to get it we would only make Judge Susan Webber Wright mad. 1 1 s X EXHIBIT 4Further the affiant sayeth not. \u0026gt;ue Stricfcfand STATE OF ARKANSAS) ) SS. COUNTY OF PULASKI) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, on this /t^^day of November, 2001. My Commission Expires: V Fs \\HOME\\BRENDAK\\ lrsd\\des-affidavit-Strickland, wpd -2- otary Public B Multi-Page TM IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, et. al., PLAINTIFFS, VS. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, DEFENDANT, LORENE JOSHUA, et. al., INTERVENORS, KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, et. al.. INTERVENORS. -X ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) X LR-C-82-866 received 16 ^soi - -o- - BE IT REMEMBERED that the above-entitled proceedings came on to be heard on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 before the HONORABLE SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT, United States District Judge. - -o- - LRSD: Motion to take depositions of ODM. Motion in limine. --O-- COURT REPORTER: WAUNZELLE P. PETRE, CCR Debbye L. Petre, CCR Post Office Box 1027 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203-1027 PETRES STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14112 APPEARANCES: ON BEHALF OF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT: CHRISTOPHER HELLER, ESQUIRE JOHN C. FENDLEY, ESQUIRE Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 ON BEHALF OF PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT: M. SAMUEL JONES, III, ESQUIRE Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 ON BEHALF OF NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT: STEPHEN W. JONES, ESQUIRE JAMES A. CARNEY, ESQUIRE Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 ON BEHALF OF JOSHUA INTERVENORS: JOHN W. WALKER, ESQUIRE JOY SPRINGER, (NON-ATTORNEY) John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 South Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 ROBERT PRESSMAN, ESQUIRE Attorney at Law 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, Massachusetts 02173 ON BEHALF OF KNIGHT INTERVENORS: RICHARD ROACHELL, ESQUIRE (Not Present) Roachell Law Firm 401 West Capitol Avenue, Fifth Floor Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14113 APPEARANCES: (Continued.) ON BEHALF OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS: MARK HAGEMEIER, ESQUIRE Assistant Attorneys General Office of Attorney General 200 Tower Building 323 Center Street, Little Rock, Arkansas Suite 200 72201 ON BEHALF OF THE OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING: ANN MARSHALL, Federal Monitor POLLY RAMER, Office Manager HORACE SMITH MELISSA GULDIN MARJIE POWELL GENE JONES (Not Present) Office of Desegregation Monitoring 124 West Capitol Street, Little Rock, Arkansas Suite 1900 72201 - -o- - PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14114 INDEX   * * WITNESS: Page: (None Present.) - -o- - EXHIBITS *  * it k (None Marked.) - -o- - Reporter's Certificate 29 - -o- - PETRE'S STENOGRT^H SERVICE (501) 376-14111 5 PROCEEDINGS 2   3 *  TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2001 4   5 THE MARSHAL: Please rise. The United 6 States District Court is in session. The 7 Honorable Susan Webber Wright presiding. 8 You may be seated. 10 11 12 THE COURT: Good afternoon. ALL : Afternoon. THE COURT: matters. I think we are here on two One involves the issue of whether 9 13 the LRSD will take the depositions of the 14 monitors tomorrow. And the other involves 15 the Motion in Limine filed by LRSD, is that 16 correct ? 17 18 19 MR. WALKER: THE COURT: motion, Yes, Your Honor. All right. I have read the and I read the response. Now, does 20 anyone have anything else to add? 21 MR. HELLER: Your Honor, I have just a 22 brief response. 23 -24 THE COURT: All right. MR. HELLER: Does the Court wants us to 25 argue the issue or just say whether or not we PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14116 10 11 12 rest on our briefs, but I would like to say that we don't seek to prohibit the testimony of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring unless the Court allows their depositions. We very specifically said we believe the monitors' testimony in this matter is inappropriate, depositions. whether or not we take their And we've specifically said that we wanted to take their depositions for another purpose, not to determine whether or not court, or what their testimony might be in but to determine whether or not there 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 13 had been an ex parte communications on the 14 merits with the Court. 15 16 So, I thought we made that clear in the deposition subpoenas. that was our only 17 purpose for the depositions. 18 THE COURT: Well, let me just say now. 19 I have ex parte conversations with the 20 21 22 23 24 25 monitors, as I do with my law clerks, and I always have. I have always decided the case the motions on the merits. And in this instance, in your motion you seem to say that the Court must have evidence that it is going to consider and has personal PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14117 1 knowledge of evidence in the case, which is 2 not true. 3 All of the evidence I am considering so 4 far. on the issues before the Court, is the 5 6 7 evidence that you've presented. and that is your Compliance Report and also. the evidence Joshua has submitted, that Joshua did not get 10 11 12 13 14 through monitors really. from the monitors. If Joshua got it I am not aware of it being part of the record in this case. I am aware that both sides had approached Ms. Marshall about the possibility of talking to her. And my instructions to her, and I think I said this on the record. 8 9 15 was that if she has information that you want 16 her to share with you. she should not do it 17 except when both of you are present. In 18 other words. she should share it with both 19 sides. 20 And that does not mean that I know what 21 information she has, because Joshua, unlike 22 other proceedings where I have relied on 23 -24 25 monitoring reports and all, Joshua, in this case, because of the terms of the settlement. has the burden of proof. PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14118 1 And so, I have not been acquainted with, 2 or I shouldn't say acquainted with, I have 3 not been familiar with any information the 4 monitors might have. And she has Ms. 5 Marshall had told me that you all had asked 6 her, and I said. \"Don't talk to them unless 7 you talk to both of them, because this is an 8 adversary proceeding\". 9 And I would never gather information and 10 consider it without making it part of the 11 record of this case. That is wrong. that is 12 something a judge should never do, and I 13 think that in the 11 years that I have had 14 this case. I have decided the merits of the 15 issues before the Court on the record and not 16 on conversations I have had with the 17 18 monitors. For one thing. one I talk with. Ms. Marshall is the She is not a lawyer. none 19 of the monitors are lawyers. 20 I am the one who has to decide the case. 21 that is what I am paid to do. that is what I 22 am supposed to do. 23 Just as I have conversations with my law -_24 clerk about what they are doing, I have 25 conversation with Ms. Marshall about her PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-1411 I1 monitoring activities, but when it comes to 9 2 evidence that is relevant to this issue, 3 I don't know what evidence she has, except the 4 evidence that Joshua has entered. 5 if I did. I wouldn't consider it. 6 7 8 And even Now, as far as her being a witness, she has been a witness. she has been a witness many or several times. I don't know how 9 recently, but she and the other monitors have 10 been. And they are usually, when they are 11 witnesses, they have submitted reports and we 12 are basing court decisions on their evidence, 13 and I don't intend to do that. 14 I am not even sure that Mr. Walker is 15 going to call any of the monitors, but they 16 have been on his witness list for a long 17 time. And I presume that they are on the 18 witness list now that he has rested, but they 19 20 21 22 are for rebuttal purposes. Mr. Walker, is that why? MR. WALKER: is that correct. I have two and a half hours, as I understood, to use as I please, 23 Your Honor. -,24 25 THE COURT: MR. WALKER: Well, you have to be But it will basically be PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14111 10 for cross-examination and rebuttal. 2 THE COURT: And you know, rebuttal has 3 to be rebuttal of something he didn't 4 anticipate. So, as far as ex parte 5 conversations, I will tell you right now. 6 I have ex parte conversations with Ms. 7 Marshall, as I do with other people who work 8 for the Court. 9 And I think that the law would be that 10 would be, you know. that those conversations 11 are privileged. but I certainly do not go 12 behind the scenes and consider evidence that 13 is not in the record, that is not subject to 14 cross - examination. That is why we have these 15 lengthy hearings. 16 And I don't know, you know, what else to 17 say about it. And if she has some evidence. 18 I told her to share it with both of you, not 19 just to share it with one side. in the 20 interest of being fair. I don't know whether 21 she has any, because she was not charged in 22 your plan with monitoring your compliance. 23 All the objections come from someone -2 4 25 else, and so she is not a party to the litigation and her burden was not to come PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14111 forward with evidence. And so, as far as I 2 know and she certainly 3 with any to me. The only 4 considered is what Joshua 5 presented. 6 MR. HELLER: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 -.24 25 11 hasn't come forward evidence I and you have Your Honor, first of all, it is not fair to say that the monitors have been on Joshua's witness list for any extended period initial witness which the Court required Joshua Court, of time. They were on an list of about 50 people. pared down in a hearing, and to tell the parties and the who he really intended to call. And at that point, the monitors were deleted from the witness list. and at that point I wrote Ann Marshall to say. \"Since you won't be a witness, we won't have to meet with you.\" resolved. But we So, are several things. that is how that was concerned. Your Honor, about First of all, that ODM has had a role in this case. as a facilitator and collaborator. in addition to the monitoring role. The monitoring been very well described. It is PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-1411 formal role hasn't described12 1 generally in the executive orders and in this 2 Court's orders. But there are 10 THE COURT: Well, I think it is described also in the New Plan, isn't it, that they will remain available, as a resource? MR. HELLER: Well, the New Plan says in Section Eight, Your Honor, that concerning Joshua's obligations to bring issues of plan non-compliance forward. The only steps in 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 that process after he brings them to the 12 School District's attention is to go to ODM 13 for facilitation. 14 And that is a role. if you look at the 15 orders throughout the decade concerning the 16 Pulaski County School District for 17 development of our revised plan and other 18 situations. The monitor has played in some 19 situations a facilitating role and has to in 20 others. 21 And there is nothing in the Eighth 22 Circuit decision converting the Office of 23 Supervisor to the Office of Desegregation -2 4 Monitoring, which suggests the testimonial 25 role. PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-1411 I1 2 13 And we believe. in fact, there is discussion in some of the other cases. 3 Jenkins and Lavelle about the role of the 4 monitors and it has to be strictly 5 circumscribed to fulfill their function. 6 And we believe the job can be conformed without 7 them having to take a testimonial role, and 8 they had done that for years prior to the 9 time they testified in Pulaski County in the 10 unitary status hearing. 11 THE COURT\nWell, hold it. Now, we have 12 had monitors testify numerous times, haven't 13 we? It's not just in the unitary status 14 hearing. We have had them testify as fact 15 witnesses with respect to compliance 16 17 18 MR. WALKER: THE COURT: MR. WALKER: Your Honor, I have on numerous occasions. You probably remember the 19 Court's use of Mr. Mooney with respect to 20 Little Rock's budget issues. Most of the 21 testimony began with Little Rock being the 22 23 -2 4 25 party before the Court. THE COURT: This is before No, they have both been before the Court. MR. WALKER: Well, I understand, but for PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-1411 I1 14 the longest period it was Little Rock, and 2 you recall them having the Board Members come 3 and sit in? 4 THE COURT: Oh, yes, I do remember that. 5 yes . 6 7 MR. WALKER: All right. Well, then all the monitors. or virtually all of the 8 monitors had occasions to have something to 9 say to the Court at one time or another, and 10 it was in Little Rock. 11 MR. HELLER: Well, Your Honor, my 12 position is that the job that was set out in 13 the Eight Circuit's Order and this Court's 14 Order, the monitors can be done without their 15 testimony. 16 They can provide reports to the parties 17 and the Court, and I think that is their 18 19 primary function. They can work as facilitator. and if issues come to the 20 attention of the parties or the Court that 21 require a hearing. then we can have a hearing 22 and resolve those things. 23 And the problem with the monitors 24 becoming witnesses is that it puts the 25 parties in a very difficult position. because PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-141115 1 the monitors have been described repeatedly, 2 as an arm of the Court. 3 I think in one transcript the Court 4 says, \"The monitors are a part of the Court\". 5 And at another place, just before Ann 6 Marshall's testimony in the PCSSD hearings. 7 the Court says. \"People tend to think that 8 when the monitor speaks she speaks for me. 9 10 11 but she doesn't.\" common perception. for the parties. And I think that's a So, it creates a problem 12 And I think in the way communication is 13 perceived in the public, if the parties are 14 required to oppose the people. who are 15 described as an arm of the Court, hired by 16 the Court, and in whom the Court has placed 17 its confidence over the last decade. 18 THE COURT: Well, this is the first time 19 any party in this litigation has called into 20 question whether the monitor should testify. 21 22 23 -J24 25 as to what she finds in her monitoring. can't testify. no one in the Office of Desegregation Monitoring can testify. whether the District is unitary. suggest that. She as to I have to PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-141110 11 12 13 14 15 16 I don't know why she shouldn't be able to testify, as to what she has found, if anything, with respect to the representations that the Little Rock School District has made in it's Compliance Report, to the extent that the office has information about that. And  again, if they have specific information they have not shown it to me. and the reason is we are pursuing it from a different direction. I emphasize to all concerned that this was Joshua, who has to carry the burden of proof, and it is Joshua's evidence. Now, i f Ms . Marshall has some evidence, she has not shared it with me. I don't have it, and the only thing I am going to look at 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 16 is what has been presented and received in 17 this Court. 18 And the Court now, she might have 19 20 21 22 23 -J2 4 25 some, any. I have not specifically asked her for I just said, \"If you have anything. share it with both parties at the same time.\" That has been the extent of my involvement. because I put the burden, as I should, I believe, under the plan. on Joshua. therefore, I don't believe I am Now, PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14111 17 going to overrule your request that the 2 monitor be excluded. The monitor will be 3 4 5 6 7 8 treated like any other witness. You are free to impeach the monitor. You claim in your motion she has made statements or a statement against your client, and you may impeach her and put that on the record, to see if that is her if 9 she made that statement, and if she is biased 10 11 against your client on that basis. you are entitled to do that. I think if you have a 12 good faith basis for asking her that 13 question. 14 Now, keep in mind that I am not even 15 certain that Mr. Walker will call them, that 16 is up to him. All of the evidence I have 17 looked at so far has been Joshua's evidence. 18 and mostly from your School District 19 employees. 20 And I want you and Mr. Pendley to focus 21 on evidence to show the Court that what you 22 have presented to the Court on March 15 with 23 24 respect to your compliance was truthful. accurate, and honest\nspecifically with and 25 respect to the evaluations and the discipline. PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-141118 1 Those are the two areas we are focusing 2 on. That is what I am going to be focusing 3 on, not on what Ms. Marshall said or 4 anything, but she hasn't I don't need to 5 talk with her about this, all I need to do is 6 focus on the evidence in this hearing and the 7 hearings we've had previously and the ones 8 that we will have next week. 9 That is the focus of the Court. 10 And I don't think I am going to need her 11 testimony to make a decision. And I don't 12 think that but if Mr. Walker wants to get 13 her testimony into the record, he may. 14 15 Now, with respect to her deposition. you want to if she is going to be a if 16 witness and you want to take her deposition, 17 I think that is fine. And you may ask her 18 about ex parte communications, except those 19 to the extent that she might have given me 20 evidence. 21 But usually, any ex parte -- anything 22 like that is going to be absolutely 23 privi1eged. But if you want her to share 24 with you any evidence she has given me, I 25 will say I waive the privilege. PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14111 MR. HELLER: So, I can assume, Your 2 Honor, is that doesn't really provide us an 3 adequate way to get at the problem if, in 4 fact, there have been ex 5 in which the monitor has 6 evidence on the merits. 7 THE COURT: Well, I 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 parte conversations. provided the Court tell you what. I don't know how else to deal with this. I know that years and years ago, when I believe there was an Arkansas Democrat reporter. that right. was it remember I was all had had some major Democrat reporter? IS MS . MARSHALL: Business. THE COURT: It I thought it Anyway, office, wanted of me is some then a Democrat reporter? laid up from surgery. surgery. Was it a I I I believe it was Arkansas was Arkansas Business? was the Arkansas Democrat. reporter went to Ms. Marshall's it was Ms. Brown's office, and to see all her records. And my direction to her was show him all your records. to you or you privileged. I but any communications from to me, don't show him. look upon her just as I PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-1411 That1 would a law clerk, in 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 terms of the privilege of the communication. But if she had anything else, you know, to show that reporter, show him. ever came of it. And nothing She showed him the whole. you know, all of her files and everything else. And you know, I would tell her the same thing. tell you the same thing, the Democrat Gazette is here. look at whatever she has. She has been very thorough in her 11 reports. 12 Usually when an issue is before the 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Court, it is something that she has investigated and reported. and we have an opportunity for you to object and all. am and I not intending to rely on her for that. am going to place the burden on Joshua. so. if you want to depose her. right with me. Now, Ms . And that's all I think Mr. Jones is not here, but Powell is. I think you wanted to depose I 22 Gene Jones, Marjie Powell, and Ann Marshall, 23 is that right? 24 25 MR. HELLER: THE COURT: Yes, Your Honor. And that is fine with me. PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14111 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 21 If they might be witnesses, I will certainly permit you to depose them. MR. HELLER: Let me just say, Your Honor, the Court's description of the monitor. as similar to your law clerk. we think is exactly correct. And I think the case law IS clear that a law clerk can never be deposed and can never be a witness. in a 10 11 case before the THE COURT: correct, except Court. Well, that is absolutely in this case. The Eighth 9 12 Circuit has told me to appoint a monitor. I 13 14 did, that . and the Eighth Circuit directed me to do And I will recite into the record now 15 all the times that Ann Marshall and someone 16 in her office has testified in this matter. 17 The record will reflect that on January 18 19 21, 1992, and on June 30, testified. Also, Ms. 1998 Ms. Marshall Guldin testified on 20 January 23rd, 1992, May 29, 1992, March 19, 21 1993, April 19, 1993 and January 27, 1994. 22 23 24 Bill Mooney testified June 23, August 11, 1995 . December 18, 1995 and Bob Morgan testified 1991 and June 23rd, 1995. 25 Marjie Powell testified March 19, ' 93 , PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14111 2 3 4 5 6 22 April 19, '93, November 17, '93, January 26, ' 94 and June 3 0, Horace Smith testified January 22nd, '92, March 19, '93, April 19, '93, and November 17, Connie Hickman Tanner, testified April 19, '93, June 6, ' 93 ' 98 . ' 93 . and January 27, '94. 7 Again, anything that I frankly don't 8 even know whether Ms. Marshall has any 9 personal knowledge about the issues that are 10 before the Court today. If she does, she may 11 testify about them. 12 And I know that this case is unusual, 13 14 but I've received her testimony before. have received it and I I've received stuff from 15 her before that was very favorable to the 16 District, and in fact you have been released 17 from some of our supervision based on her 18 - that was based on her reports to this 19 Court. And I don't know how her testimony 20 differs from her monitoring reports in terms 21 of its evidentiary value. 22 And you know, the Court has considered 23 evidence when it went in favor of the 24 25 District, some Intervenors. even against the Joshua So, this is the way I have PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-141123 1 handled it in the past, but I can assure you 2 I will decide any motion before the Court 3 solely on the record, not on conversations 4 that I have with my law clerk or with her. 5 or with Ms. Marshall that is. 6 I don't know how else to handle it. 7 If it need be. the Eighth Circuit I am sure. can 8 give me guidance with respect to the 9 procedures I should follow. 10 I have always tried to stay on the record with the parties. 11 and I will continue to do that. I don't have 12 ex parte conversations with the parties, but 13 I do with the monitor. 14 And so, my ruling is you may take the 15 16 depositions. Mr. Walker, are you available for deposition - I mean. are you available. 17 if they want to depose Ms. Marshall? 18 MR. WALKER: Yes, I am. I am available 19 tomorrow. 20 21 THE COURT: MR. WALKER: All right. Anyway I had understood that that 22 was the date that Mr. Heller wanted to take 23 24 her deposition. Your Honor, Your Honor, this I think. what Mr. Heller is really saying. 25 if you look at the last paragraph, the next PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-141124 1 to last paragraph of Mr. Heller's motion, he 2 is really asking the Court to recuse. 3 And his statement to the Court indicated that by 4 analogy to a law clerk, that that was the 5 Court's general view. he picked up on that. 6 I think that he should be man enough on 7 the record to reflect that he is really 8 asking the Court to recuse. And that way we 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 can address that issue. I don't think that we are here on the depositions tomorrow, they are to be taken. to afford him an if opportunity to inquire outside of the facts of this case about various things that are unrelated to this motion into the relationship of the monitor. THE COURT: I just said that any evidence that Ann Marshall has given me about the motions before the Court, which are your objections to the discipline and the evaluations, you know, she can give to him. MR. WALKER: THE COURT: Well, Your Honor I have your evidence, which is before the Court, but I don't anticipate receiving any, you know, I don't - I call Ms. Marshall, as sometimes a witness when I have 9 PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-141125 1 an issue, or call one of her monitors, and I 2 didn't anticipate calling them in this 3 matter. I frankly did not. 4 And sometimes I ask her for evidence and 5 documents and what have you before a hearing. 6 and I didn't, because I am counting on 7 because Mr. Walker has the burden of 8 proof. I can't make it clearer than that. 9 And it is up to Mr. Walker whether he wants 10 to call her. 11 MR. WALKER: Your Honor, my only concern 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 is that Mr. Heller not be in a position where tomorrow, anyway. he asks about the various communications and conversations that Ms. Brown or any of her staff have had directly with you. THE COURT: all the time. Well, I think we we talk You know, we get on the 19 telephone, and we talk a lot about this case. 20 21 22 about her monitoring activities. know, all of that is privileged. is privileged. And so, you All of that 23 But to the extent that she has provided 24 25 me with evidence about your case. her to show it to you. I direct because I don't PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14111 2 3 4 26 remember what it was. Maybe she has given me something, and I don't remember it. MR. WALKER: That's fine, Your Honor. THE COURT: And I don't intend to rely 5 on anything she says or any opinion she has. 6 because I have always said it is up to 7 Joshua, you know, the compliance report was 8 filed as scheduled. and the Little Rock 9 School District at that point was 10 presumptively in compliance until someone 11 carries the burden of proof, to show that 12 they are not. 13 14 Mr. Walker filed his objections. now we are in the midst of whether and so of 15 finding whether his objections are well 16 taken. And all of this. pursuing Ms. 17 Marshall or the Court or anything like that. 18 trying to point the finger at me, when you 19 should be trying to determine whether, in 20 21 fact, you have evidence to support your compliance statement of March 15, 2001, 22 particularly with respect to those two 23 areas. That is what I am going to be looking 24 at . 25 And I anticipate that you will have PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-14111 27 evidence to show me that what you presented 2 3 4 5 is accurate, as I said earlier. Are there any other issues? MR. HELLER: No, Your Honor. MR. WALKER: No, Your Honor. 6 COUNSEL: (Indicated no or no response.) 7 THE COURT: If you want to take her 8 deposition or the deposition of Ms. Powell, 9 that is fine. Mr. Jones is out of town. she 10 tells me. 11 MS. MARSHALL: He is out of the state. 12 Your Honor. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 THE COURT: All right. MS. MARSHALL: can be located. THE COURT: MR. WALKER: I have no idea where he Okay. Your Honor, we will not impose an objection for us taking Mr. Jones' deposition after Court on Monday, if they want to do that, that's the 19th. THE COURT: All right. And keep in mind. this is not I am not going to 23 receive testimony in this hearing from a 24 monitor on that monitor's opinion on unitary 25 status . That is improper. and I would not do PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-141110 11 12 13 14 28 that. That is up to me to decide. I don't receive opinions like that, that is strictly a judicial determination. And keep in mind the monitors are not lawyers. And I am not even sure the extent to which the monitors are aware of what is going on in other courts, because their job is just to determine compliance with your plans, plural. And that is what they do, they just try to find out whether you are doing what you had promised to do in your Consent Decrees. And unitary status is something entirely different. And I am very aware of that, and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 15 I know that is why I am paid, although 16 nothing extra. I might add. 17 Anything else? 18 19 20 21 MR. HELLER: THE COURT: MR. WALKER: (THEREUPON, No, Your Honor. All right. No, Your Honor. at 3:00 p.m., the taking of 22 the above-entitled hearing was concluded.) 23 - -o- - 24 25 PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-141129 CERTIFICATE STATE OF ARKANSAS SS . : COUNTY OF HEMPSTEAD ) ) ) I, Waunzelle P. Petre, Certified Court Reporter and notary public in and for the County of Hempstead, State of Arkansas, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full. true and correct transcript of the proceedings had in the entitled and numbered cause on the date hereinabove set forth. The said proceedings were reduced to typewritten form by me or under my supervision and the same fully. truly and correctly reflects the proceedings had. WHEREFORE, I have subscribed my signature and affixed my notarial seal as such notary public at the City of Hope, County of Hempstead, State of Arkansas, this 15th day of November 2001. K iQiuui JU TV T TXT rz rn T T n WAUNZELLE IE . PETRE, CCR NOTARY PUBLIC IN ANIX-.FOR  SGUNTYT^ ARKANSAS HEMPS TE, LS CERT ICATE #119 i I I My Commission Expires: . December 19, 2009 . , PETRE'S STENOGRAPH SERVICE (501) 376-1411Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. CASE NO. 4:82CV00866SWW 6 7 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS 8 9 10 MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL RECEIVED INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL NOV 1 6 2001 INTERVENORS 11 12 13 UfriCt Or OeSEGREGATiON MOWTOflINQ k k k k k k Jr Jr  k * k k * * * * * * * -k * * 14 ORAL DEPOSITION OF ANN MARSHALL 15 (Taken November 14, 2001) 16 k k k k Jr k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k Jr k 17 18 APPEARTVNCES: 19 20 21 22 On Behalf of the Plaintiff MR. CHRIS HELLER and MR. CLAY FENDLEY Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, Arkansas 23 24 25 I? EXHiBIT 1 2 3 On Behalf of North Little Rock School District MR. J. ALLEN CARNEY Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Page 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 On Behalf of Intervenors Mrs. Lorene Joshua, et al MR. JOHN WALKER Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 ALSO PRESENT: JOY SPRINGER, TAMMY DOWNS 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 4 ANSWERS AND DEPOSITION OF ANN MARSHALL, a witness produced at the request of the Plaintiff, taken in the above-styled and numbered cause on Wednesday, the 14th day of November, 2001, before Jerry R. Lawson, CCR, a Notary Public in and for Jefferson County, Arkansas, commencing at 2:40 p.m., at the offices of Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark, 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000, Little Rock Arkansas 72201, pursuant to the agreement hereinafter set forth. STIPULATIONS IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED BY and between the parties through their respective counsel that the deposition of ANN MARSHALL may be taken for any and all purposes according to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Page 3 Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 INDEX TOPIC Stipulations PAGE 4 Witness Sworn In: Ann Marshall Examination by Mr. Heller Examination by Mr. Walker Further Examination by Mr. Heller Further Examination by Reporter's Certificate Mr. Walker 5 5 118 125 129 133 EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Eidiibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 23 23 23 24 24 80 (Exhibits Attached Following Transcript.) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PROCEEDINGS WHEREUPON, ANN MARSHALL, having been called for examination by counsel for the Plaintiff, and having first been duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: EXAMINATION BY MR. HELLER: Q. Would you tell us your name and address, please, Ms. Marshall. A. Ann Marshall, 1 Riviera Circle, Little Rock, Arkansas. Q. Okay. And how are you employed? A. Im a desegregation monitor for Judge Susan Webber Wright. Q. Would you review for us briefly your education. A. I have an undergraduate from Hendrix College in English. I have an advanced degree in volunteer management from the Arkansas Public Administration Consortium. I'm certified in planning and training with the Institute of Cultural Affairs. I'm a certified master trainer with the National Association of Partners in Education, which is headquartered in Washington, D C. Q. Do you have any other certifications relating to 2 (Pages 2 to 5)Page 6 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 \u0026lt;) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the field of education? A. Not that are current Q, Have you previously been certified in the field of education? A Q A Q A Q Yes. What certifications did you hold? English. Okay. And you're certified to teach English? Yes. And would you review briefly your employment history. A. How long do you want me to go  how far would you like for me to go back? Q. Well, let's- A. Do you want me to start now and go backwards? Q. Let's start at the beginning of the things related to education. A. I taught English and science in Forrest City from approximately 1970 to 1972. 1 moved to Little Rock and was the -- no, I'm sorry, that's incorrect. 1 was an order editor for Eaton Hoisting Equipment in Forrest City for approximately a year and a half. Then I moved to Little Rock, and 1 was the first woman employed as an epidemiologist in the field of venereal disease for the State Health Department. 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 8 Q. Prior to the time you assumed your position as the director of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, what was your highest salary, approximately? A. 1 don't recall. Are you saying as an associate in the -- Q. Well, let's say  A.  Office of Metropolitan Supervisor? Q.  before you went to work for the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor, what was the highest paying job you held? A. Probably coordinator of Volunteers in Public Schools and Partners in Education. Q. And approximately what did that pay? A. I have no recollection, Chris. I could - somewhere probably in the high 4O's. I'm not sure. It's been a long time. Q. And do you recall what your beginning salary was with the Office of Metropolitan Supervisor? A. No, I don't. Q. Okay. Do you recall what your beginning salary was as director of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring? A. I believe it was ninety-eight five in that - perhaps ninety-eight. 1 don't recall exactly. But that's close. Page? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Then I joined the Little Rock School District as the coordinator of Volunteers in Public Schools. I was in that position until approximately 1984, '85, when 1 was employed by the Arkansas Department of Education as a coordinator to develop the Arkansas School Volunteer Program. I remained in that position for about a year. 1 returned to the Little Rock School District as coordinator of Volunteers in Public Schools. Also during that time, I was coordinator of Partners in Education. I was employed by Mr. Revelle as an associate monitor in the Office of Metropolitan Supervisor beginning in 1989. '88 or '89. And since that time with the conversion of the office to the Office of Desegregation Monitonng, I've been employed steadily, assuming the position of monitor in April of 1991. Q. Okay. Did you teach in Forrest City for one year or two years? A. Approximately a year and a half. Q. Okay, And which school or school district did you  A. Forrest Academy. Q.  teach in? A. It was Forrest Academy. It was a private school. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 9 Q. So, you've never worked as a school administrator, principal or assistant principal or anything like that? A. Ive worked as an administrator in a school district by virtue of my employment, on the administrative salary scale, in Partners in Education, but I have not been a principal or an assistant principal. Q. Have you received any training from the Arkansas Department of Education related to their new ACTAP system and benchmark exams or Smart Start or anything related to that new state curriculum standards and benchmarks? A. Training  can you be a little bit more specific? Q. Well, was there any formal training that you attended to learn about the ACTAP standards or the benchmark exams? A. I think the sessions that 1 attended would be more accurately called awareness sessions. To me, there is a distinction behveen awareness and training. But 1 did attend a session that was to begin to help people understand what was coming. Q. Do you know whether or not ADE offers any formal training related to the implementation of ACTAP, the benchmark exams or the ciuriculum standards? 3 (Pages 6 to 9)Page 10 Page 12 1 2 3 4 5 (\u0026gt; 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Yes, they do for the  for the State's teachers and administrators. Q. Has anyone in your office received such training? A. I believe that Gene Jones has attended sessions. Q. How would you describe your relationship with Judge Wright? A. She's my supervisor. Q. Do you ever see Judge Wright socially? A. As far as--well, 1 see her at lunch. We share lunch. She's in - it's her custom to take staff members to lunch for their birthdays, and I'm asked to join that. She and I attend the same church\nand so we occasionally will see each other at services, although she tends to go to the early service and I tend to go to the later one. Q. Okay. Have you been to her home or has she been to your home? A, I was  she's never been to my home. 1 was in her home approximately maybe eight or nine years ago. It's been a long time. Q. And has Judge Wright ever been to your offices? A. She's been to the new offices one time, to see them. And before that in our old offices when we were over at the River Market, she was also there one time, to see  just to see what we've done with the space. 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 telling you what to do, because I'm not representing you. But I would suggest to you tliat's not within the scope of what she told Cliris that he could talk about. THE REPORTER: She told what? MR. WALKER: Chris that he could inquire into. THE REPORTER: Thank you. MR. HELLER: Well, unless I heard incorrectly  A. I said \"no.\" Q. (By Mr. Heller) Have you ever asked the judge for legal or personal advice on any matters? A. Never. Q. Have you ever made any public appearances with her or worked on any speeches for her or anything like that? A. I don't know if we are where we're supposed to be\nbut I certainly don't mind telling you, no. Q A. Q. A. How would you define your job? Hard. Could you give us the expanded version? Sometimes harder than others. My role is to assist the Court in monitoring the school case. Q. And how do you go about that? 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 11 Q. Besides your office and her chambers, what places have you been together with the judge? A. Q A. Q To lunch. Do you consider Judge Wright to be a friend? A colleague. Do you ever discuss family or personal matters with her? A. Well, I think that the judge was clear yesterday that what passes between us is privileged. So, I guess I would hesitate to go there. Q. Well, I'm not asking you what may have been said in that regard but only whether or not you and the judge have such discussions. A. In general terms. She has a school-age child and I have school-age children. So, comments in a general nature. Q. Did she discuss with you her decision about whether or not to put her child in private school? MR. WALKER: Objection - A. No. MR. WALKER: - to that. I don't think that would be a proper subject for inquiry, and I would just flag that for presentation to the judge for inquiry. And I would suggest to you  I'm not 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 13 A. Well, a number of approaches. Primarily we monitor in three main modes. We review a number of documents that are produced by the school districts, some on a routine basis, others may be exceptional in nature. We make visits to the schools, and we - we observ'e. We look around. .And thirdly, we will talk to individuals. Sometimes those people call us, unsolicited phone calls. But those are the three primary modes by which we collect infonmation. Sometimes we will target a specific topic by virtue of perhaps a provision in the desegregation plan, an issue that has become prominent by one means or another. And then oftentimes we will make a formal written report to the Court. And, of course, you've had  you've seen a number of those documents. Q. What's the purpose of assisting the Court in monitoring a school case? A. To enable the Court to fulfill  MR. WALKER: Just a - A.  its charge. MR. WALKER: -moment. I'm going to object to that, too. Tliat - that is something that the Court can only determine and the Court of Appeals and that's already specifically reduced to writing. 4 (Pages 10 to 13)Page 14 Page 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Now, if there is another purpose that Ms. Brown  Marshall has identified and reduced to writing and the Court has agreed on and it's pretty clear, then I don't think that there would be any objection to her answering that. But other than that, I think that that's a question properly  a question more properly directed to the Court. Q. (By Mr. Heller) Let me tell you this, Ms. Brown, since I believe that before we went on the record - I'm sorry, Ms. Marshall -- before we went on the record, you said you had not been deposed before, correct? A. I don't ever remember having been deposed. Q. Okay. Well, the way this works is Mr. Walker can make objections for the record, but you will still be required to answer the question unless you personally decide not to. But he's not your lawyer. MR. WALKER: That's right. A. I understand that. Q. (By Mr. Heller) 1 suppose he can advise you not to answer a question, but it's up to us whether or not to do that, so -- A. Well, 1 really don't -- MR. WALKER: Ms. Marshall - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 had -- I'm  that's been so long. But I started to say I think that it was perhaps based on that of the Metropolitan Supervisor, but I don't have direct knowledge of that. Q. Okay. Do you know  so, are you saying that this job description you're referring to was in existence when you assumed the office? A. No, not the same job description. It was certainly modified after the Eighth Circuit's ruling, and  and 1 don't have any direct knowledge. Q. Okay. How is your job described in that document? A. I haven't looked at it in years, and I didn't review it for today. I didn't anticipate that question. (5. Is it a document that Judge Wright has approved in any way, to your knowledge? A. As far as I know, it's  it came from her office. Q. Have you ever discussed your job description with Judge Wright? A. Q A. Q Years ago when 1 was hired, yes. Has your job description changed over the years? You mean the written document? Well, first the written document, has that  when Page 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A.  know the protocol. MR. WALKER: --1 would --1 would ask on that kind of question you recess the deposition to let the Court answer that question or be directed, because you're not represented by counsel. But you have to  of course, like he says, you have to exercise your own choice. A. 1 do know that the judge is available should we need a ruling\nbut candidly, this is a new procedure for me and I don't understand the - I don't know the protocol. Q. (By Mr. Heller) Well, my only question is that you described your job as assisting the Court in monitoring the school case\nand my question is: To what end? What's the -- what's the purpose of that work? A. In order to supply information to the parties and to the Court that can be helpful, particularly in promoting compliance with the commitments that the parties have made. Q. Okay. Do you have a written job description? A. Q. A. Ido. Where did that come from? 1 believe that it was a modification of what 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 17 is the last time the written document was changed'.^ A. I don't know that it has changed. Q. Has it changed in die last five years, to your knowledge? A. I don't believe so. Q. Do you ever have discussions with Judge Wright about exactly what your job is and what you're trying to accomplish? A. Well, certainly we'd discuss what it is that my job is. She is my supervisor, and 1 report to her. Q. Well, can you relate any discussions you've had about what your job is with Judge Wright? A. No. I guess perhaps I don't understand your question. I'm not trying to be coy. I'm just trying to understand what you're saying. Q. Well, I'm trying to understand what the understanding is between you and Judge Wright about what your job is. And if it's accurately described in a written job description, if you can tell me about that\nor if it's not, you can tell me about whatever discussions you've had with the judge. A. I believe that it's correctly embodied in the job description. And I don't have that with me, but it's something that's available. Q. Well, is there anything that you recall about it 5 (Pages 14 to 17)1 Page 18 or can relate now about the understanding between you 2 with Judge Wright about what your job is? 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. WALKER\nWell, let me say one other thing. As I understand it, this is about to get information in preparation for the hearing on Monday. It is not to deal with the question of disqualification, since Mr. Heller was not ambitious enough, if  if courageous enough to make a motion to recuse the Court. So, 1 ask, Ms. Brown, that you limit your questions or - or that you call the judge to see whether your questions should be limited to matters that relate to the evidentiary hearing that is set for the 19th and the 20th. If he wishes to challenge the Court and her authority based on her personal relationship with you or anjlJiing else, he'll have ample time beyond the time to prepare that we are supposed to be spending getting prepared for this hearing on Monday. MR. HELLER: Well, if you'll read the deposition subpoena, it's limited to matters concerning Ms. Brown's relationship to the Page 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 disqualify the Court. MR. HELLER\nYou are not required to sit here. MR. WALKER: So, I suggest that we recess the hearing and call the judge. I suggest we do that. MR. HELLER: There's no reason to. MR. WALKER: Ms. Brown, do you mind  Ms. Marshall, do you mind doing that? THE WITNESS: Well, actually considering what I've just told you, this varies considerably from what I had been given to understand by you yesterday. So, perhaps that will be best thing to do. MR. WALKER\nThe deposition notice says one thing and what Mr. Heller said in court is another thing, and they both have to be taken together. And the Court  MR. HELLER: You're absolutely incorrect. I pointed out to the Court that you were wrong when you suggested that I wanted to take these depositions about what their testimony might be. I pointed out in court -- and it will show up in the transcript -- that we specifically asked to Page 19 Page 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Court, not what her testimony might be on Monday. And that's what we intend to pursue. A. From our conversations jesterday, Chris, what I understood you intended to ask me was about documents that 1 had shared with the Court, which I've prepared. Any other area, I have not reviewed. Q. (By Mr. Heller) Okay. Well, I -- and I understand that, and I'm just asking you for as much as you can remember about these issues. And we're certainly going to talk about the documents, but our purpose is to talk about the communications generally and the relationship generally behveen your office and Judge Wright. MR. WALKER: Well, let us - I would like to suggest that we recess the hearing and call the judge. My understand is that we weren't to be wasting time on matters that the Court is not going to be addressing at this hearing. Even though she said you could depose her, I don't tliink I want to be sitting in a room listening to you take the time that we're supposed to be spending preparing for trial on the 19th and 20th, trying to  for you to find ways to try to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 take these depositions concerning the communications between the Court and the monitor's office. MR. WALKER: Well, that's concerning the hearing on Monday\nand she said very clearly on the issues that are before the Court on  on Monday and Tuesday, she can only  Ms. Brown's -- or Ms. Marshall's testimony can only relate to the issues that she told us both that we could present. THE WITNESS: Well, I'm happy to share what documents I found, Chris\nbut my understanding was that that was the thrust of your inquiry. And since I don't  I'm not represented by any counsel and I'm not eager to be in the middle of a disagreement between you hvo, maybe the best thing would be to call Judge Wright. MR. HELLER: Well, let's -- before we do that, let's at least take a look at the documents that you've brought with you in response to the deposition subpoena. ,. Two that I've sent to the Court  and these A. actually went to Julie, and I sent those today and they were the conununication that -- thank you, Tammy -- 1 6 (Pages 18 to 21)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 22 got from you. saying that the documents still weren't ready, so I informed Julie. Whether those were shared with the judge. I truly do not know. But I did send them to the Court, because we're responsible for organizing the documents and I can't get my work done without them, so I notified my boss. In July, Chris, you sent me a letter, which you copied to the parties\nand I shared that with the Court. MR. FENDLEY: Do you want to mark these separately? MR. HELLER: No, I want to take a look at them first. A. And I shared with the Court the response that I sent to you, Chris, with the errors that we had discovered in the compliance report. That, of course, also went to all counsel and to Dr. James\nand I notified her that we had, by means of a - of a copy of this letter, that we had shared this information with you-all. And then on the 23rd of July, which is the same day, I sent a letter to Dr. James, which I didn't copy to anybody\nbut 1 did ultimately share that with the Court, because 1 was very frustrated in my monitoring by not being able to procure  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q Page 24 (Marshall Exhibit No. 4 was marked for identification.) MR. HELLER: And the July 23rd letter to Dr. Ken James from Arm Marshall will be No. 5. (Marshall Exhibit No. 5 was marked for identification.) (By Mr. Heller) Are those all the documents that you've brought here in response  A. Yes. Q.  to our request? A. Yes. Q. Have you ever provided any other written document to the Court that hasn't been provided to the parties? A. This is it. When you say \"ever,\" within the last recent time\nbut I have - I can recall nothing that has been shared with the Court that has not been shared with you-all and ultimately been a part of the record at no time. That's not my -- that's not the way I work. Q. Insofar as you can recall, these are the only written documents that you've provided the Court in the last several years\nis that fair to say? A. Yes, other than what's been public. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 23 THE WITNESS: And I dont know if you need these or not, Jerry. MR. HELLER: Well. let's go ahead and mark these as exhibits to the deposition in the order in which youve provided them, starting with  let's make No. 1 the  Q. (By Mr. Heller) Is this the first one, the one with the  the longer of the two? A. Yes, that's the first one. Q. Okay. MR. HELLER: Let's make this first E-mail document Exhibit 1. (Marshall Exhibit No. 1 was marked for identification.) MR. HELLER: The second one will be E?diibit 2. (Marshall Exhibit No. 2 was marked for identification.) MR. HELLER: Then the letter to Ann Marshall, dated July 16, 2001, will be No. 3. (Marshall E.xhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.) MR. HELLER: Tlie response from Ann Marshall, dated July 23rd, 2001, will be No. 4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 25 Q. What do you mean by \"what's been public\"? A. Just exactly what I said a minute ago. that either I have reported to the Court in a published report or its been part of the record. Q. What work is it that you're trying to get done that you need our exhibits to do? A. Because we are the repository for many court records and  and actually 1 think that's really a matter of space. But we are very organized, and we organize the library. And so, documents that might accumulate in the Court's chambers are sent to us. When we received the voluminous number of documents for the summer hearings, you-all delivered them to us and then we organized them for the Court. As a matter of fact, they are very unwieldy, and I'm sure you can appreciate that, because it was so many papers. You know, we've even joked about the  the time that I measured them and it was ox er 7 feet. Its now over 9 feet. But we organized them into notebooks so that they would be readily accessible for the Court and for you-all, too. As a matter of fact, Polly said - she suggested that you might want to organize them in notebooks rather than just individual documents. And so. to finish that job. to expedite the proceedings and 1 (Pages 22 to 25)Page 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 hopefully make it easier on all of us, we're trying to organize them. And that's why we didn't have this proceeding over there, because our table is full of documents that we're trying to get organized, so we know what we have. And, for example, you've given a list of exhibits\nand we're comparing that list with the documents that we have to find out what might be missing. Q. And what do you do once you've made your review- of those documents? Do you have any communication with the Court about the documents? A. We  they've been organized\nand they're all there, or if documents are missing  I'm not saying they're not  at this time, I don't know that we have documents missing. Just to let them know that they're in an organized order and we have them there with our little trolleys and boxes. Q. Do you have a routine that you follow to prepare for hearings in this case in your office? A. A general routine. It may vary from hearing to hearing. This hearing we've had little to do, because the burden of proof has been on Mr. Walker. Q. Do you usually meet with the judge before any hearing in this case? A. Sometimes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 28 upon me to let my supervisor know that I am about my work. Q, Have you ever said to anyone that part of your job is to help the judge, quote, \"prepare,\" closed quote, for court? A. I may have. Q. Well, do you understand that to be part of your job? A. That's what I do as part of my job when I can, like organizing documents. But I --1 don't have any legal training\nand so, legal matters are beyond my ken. Q. Well, I'm certainly not talking about legal matters\nbut my question is whether or not you have discussions with the judge concerning factual matters before or during any of the hearings in this case. MR. WALKER: Just a moment. I think that's another one of those questions that you should ask the judge. A. I think that's a little afield. I don't discuss  MR. WALKER: Well, let me say this. From time to time, the judge has said on the record when I've asked if Ms. Brown should  to give me this or give me that, to check the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 27 Q. It seems like you always enter the courtroom from the chambers. Is that part of the routine that you at least have some visit with the Court before the  A. Pleasantries. Q.  hearings? A. To be  she is my boss\nand so, 1 always want to be polite and speak. But many times there's absolutely nothing that passes between us about the proceedings. You know, it's, \"Hi, how's your job?\" Q. Have there been times when you have had substantive discussions about the issues with Judge Wright before a hearing? A. Q A. Q We've discussed monitoring issues many times. What do you mean by \"monitoring issues\"? The substance of my monitoring. That's my job. Do you mean that you've discussed the findings you've made during the course of your work? A. Those are published\nand once they've been published, yes. 1 mean, there are certainly times that - that - 1 mean, the best e.xample that 1 can give you right now was being Ihistrated and not being able to get the evaluation documents from Little Rock, communicating that to the judge in the form of a copy of the letter that 1 have written, and just to keep her posted about my efforts. 1 think it is incumbent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 29 record or do this or that. So, I think that that's the kind of thing that you should ask the judge. And she said that in public court. A. And, you know, that's routine is that type of thing. Nothing that's -- that's not part of how it is that we evolve on business together. Q. (By Mr. Heller) Do you recall the hearing held May 4 of this year concerning Pulaski County's plan for implementation at middle schools? A. There was a hearing, yes. Q. One of the first things that happened at that hearing was that Judge Wright talked to Sam Jones about\na chart that she intended to put in the record. Do you recall that discussion? A. I'm sorry, can you refresh my memory? Q. Okay. I'll read to you from page 9 of the transcript. \"The Office of Desegregation Monitoring has reviewed the materials, and so have 1, but not as carefully, of course, as ODM. But they have met with me\nand so, 1 am now prepared to hear any evidence that you have in support of your motion. Before I do that, though, I want to share with you  and I don't know whether Ms. Marshall has shared with you - some charts that her office has prepared with respect to this.\" 8 (Pages 26 to 29)Page 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Q A. was. Does that help you remember - Yes.  what we were talking about? And 1  but 1 don't even remember what the chart Q. Okay. A. But that -- that was entered into the record. Q. All right. And my question is: What discussion about the case preceded the hearing that would allow Judge Wright to have a document at the very start of the hearing that she intended to introduce into evidence? MR. WALKER: 1 believe that's the kind of question that you would have to ask the judge. Ms. Bro^vn, I'd ask that you call the judge, because he's now just asking about the judge's conduct not yours. So, I would suggest that we interrupt this hearing and call Judge Wright. And I think the questions should be flagged, the last series of questions for sure, and any others that you have. Q. (By Mr. Heller) Would you be more comfortable if we did that, Ms. Brown, rather than proceed along these 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 32 with Clay Pendley, Allen Carney, Tammy Downs, Joy Springer, John Walker, Ann Marshall and our court reporter. THE COURT: Can 1 put you on a speakerphone, because Julie, the law clerk, is in here. MR. HELLER: Sure. THE COURT: Just a second. All right. MR. HELLER: Your Honor, we've had an issue raised by Mr. Walker  and Ms. Marshall seems to be concerned as well -- about the scope of the deposition. So, we thought it would be time to seek some clarification from you. 1 am asking about matters related to ODM's communications with the Court and was asking some particular questions about communications in your chambers related to the subject matter of the various hearings that have been held in this case. Mr. Walker says those are things 1 should not be able to inquire into. I've said that 1 thought I'd explained to everyone that the purpose of the deposition was to explore those types of things, rather than issues related to what Page 31 Page 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 lines? A. As I said, 1 don't want to be in the middle of your disagreement. So, perhaps that would be the best course. Q. I don't  you know, I don't want to go beyond what the judge has authorized us to do here. I understood the purpose of the deposition was to allow us to explore issues related to communications you've had with the judge. The judge said something yesterday about privileges. Mr. Walker seems to think this deposition is limited in ways that I don't think it is or should be limited. So, maybe the best thing to do is -- A. Yes, as a matter -- Q.  to discuss it with Judge Wright. A.  of clarification, I think that that would be the best course. MR. HELLER: I'll put it on the speakerphone so that you can transcribe it. (Short recess was taken.) (The following teleconference with Judge Wright was had, to wit:) THE COURT: Hello. MR. HELLER: Hello, Judge Wright. This is Chris Heller and you are on a speakerphone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Ms. Browns testimony might be. So, that's our standoff at this point. THE COURT: Yesterday 1 told you that Ms. Marshall and 1 talk a lot about her monitoring, about her activities\nand so, 1 think that for the record you're trying to make, for the purposes you're trying to make it, my acknowledgment of that would be sufficient. Again, 1 regard her as an employee who is assisting me in my task of monitoring the compliance that the consent decrees. I'm charged with monitoring and she's charged with helping me do it. MR. HELLER: Well - THE COURT: 1 will acknowledge that, in fact, we talk about the  about the school case a lot. We have -- she does have conversations with me, and you call them ex parte. 1 look upon it the same way 1 do if 1 talk to a probation officer who works for the Court before I sentence someone or I talk to a law clerk before 1 sign an order. And so, to me that is the hpe of relationship 1 have with her, although in her 9 (Pages 30 to 33)Page 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 case 1 talk about her monitoring activities. I'm not going to permit you, in essence, that we have conversations outside the hearing of the parties. MR. HELLER: Well, we're trying to determine. Your Honor -- and maybe this is within the scope of what the Court's acknowledging - but we're trying to determine whether the conversations are about things like the budget and the staff or whether they touch on the merits of the issues before the Court. And that's the reason - THE COURT: Well, to the extent that they're  and not just pure questions of law. I mean, 1 don't -1 don't talk about questions  pure questions of law to her, but 1 do talk about her monitoring activities. But that's all I'm going to say, and that's all that she needs to say. I mean, we talk on an ongoing basis about what she's monitoring, what she might do next, areas of concern and that sort of thing. We talk about her budget, her staff, all of those things. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 36 have. And while it may later be appropriate, we're preparing for the proceeding on Monday and Tuesday. And if he wants to file a motion with respect to the impropriety of her working for you or her talking to you or anything like that or you're continuing on the case, that ought to be direct instead of indirect as it is appearing - appearing here to be. THE COURT: And 1 think that he's trying to make a record, and I think that my  my statement is - you know, if it's something that he wants a record he can use. And I, of course, try to  try to be fair to the parties, and I direct her to try to be fair to the parties. MR. HELLER: Well, if there aren't any other issues at the moment. Your Honor, we'll continue the deposition. THE WITNESS: May I ask a question? MR. HELLER: Yes. Just one moment. Ann Marshall wo\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":360,"next_page":361,"prev_page":359,"total_pages":6797,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":4308,"total_count":81557,"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":40428},{"value":"StillImage","hits":35298},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":4529},{"value":"Sound","hits":3226},{"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":9445},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":8328},{"value":"African Americans","hits":5912},{"value":"Mississippi--Race relations","hits":5750},{"value":"Race relations","hits":5604},{"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":4440},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":3536}],"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":1815},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1709},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1495},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"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":1915},{"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":440}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":1769},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1670},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":969},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":853},{"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":17987},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":5437},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Montgomery County, Montgomery, 32.36681, -86.29997","hits":5151},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":4847},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4599},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":4328},{"value":"United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026","hits":3948},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2910},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2580},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":2580},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":2536}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Georgia","hits":12823},{"value":"Alabama","hits":11313},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":10220},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":8493},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":4733},{"value":"Texas","hits":4399},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":3786},{"value":"Florida","hits":2602},{"value":"Ohio","hits":2403},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1875},{"value":"New York","hits":1840}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1966","hits":10632},{"value":"1963","hits":10287},{"value":"1965","hits":10218},{"value":"1956","hits":9840},{"value":"1955","hits":9619},{"value":"1964","hits":9365},{"value":"1968","hits":9345},{"value":"1962","hits":9247},{"value":"1967","hits":8897},{"value":"1957","hits":8523},{"value":"1961","hits":8282},{"value":"1958","hits":8259},{"value":"1959","hits":8061},{"value":"1960","hits":7948},{"value":"1969","hits":7348},{"value":"1954","hits":7240},{"value":"1950","hits":7118},{"value":"1953","hits":6969},{"value":"1970","hits":6835},{"value":"1971","hits":6425},{"value":"1977","hits":6367},{"value":"1972","hits":6254},{"value":"1952","hits":6162},{"value":"1951","hits":6046},{"value":"1975","hits":5894},{"value":"1976","hits":5863},{"value":"1974","hits":5849},{"value":"1973","hits":5689},{"value":"1979","hits":5416},{"value":"1978","hits":5405},{"value":"1980","hits":5366},{"value":"1995","hits":4885},{"value":"1981","hits":4811},{"value":"1994","hits":4704},{"value":"1948","hits":4597},{"value":"1949","hits":4573},{"value":"1996","hits":4542},{"value":"1982","hits":4417},{"value":"1947","hits":4317},{"value":"1985","hits":4313},{"value":"1998","hits":4281},{"value":"1983","hits":4261},{"value":"1997","hits":4258},{"value":"1984","hits":4152},{"value":"1999","hits":4074},{"value":"1946","hits":4047},{"value":"1945","hits":4018},{"value":"1986","hits":4006},{"value":"1990","hits":3988},{"value":"1943","hits":3900},{"value":"1944","hits":3896},{"value":"2000","hits":3894},{"value":"2001","hits":3876},{"value":"1942","hits":3868},{"value":"1940","hits":3765},{"value":"1941","hits":3758},{"value":"1987","hits":3744},{"value":"2002","hits":3624},{"value":"1991","hits":3553},{"value":"1936","hits":3507},{"value":"1939","hits":3501},{"value":"1992","hits":3500},{"value":"2003","hits":3489},{"value":"1993","hits":3478},{"value":"1938","hits":3466},{"value":"1937","hits":3450},{"value":"1989","hits":3441},{"value":"1930","hits":3378},{"value":"1988","hits":3355},{"value":"1935","hits":3307},{"value":"1933","hits":3271},{"value":"1934","hits":3271},{"value":"1932","hits":3255},{"value":"1931","hits":3240},{"value":"2005","hits":3143},{"value":"2004","hits":2995},{"value":"2006","hits":2860},{"value":"1929","hits":2790},{"value":"1928","hits":2272},{"value":"1921","hits":2124},{"value":"1925","hits":2040},{"value":"1927","hits":2026},{"value":"1924","hits":2012},{"value":"2016","hits":2011},{"value":"1926","hits":2010},{"value":"1920","hits":1976},{"value":"1923","hits":1955},{"value":"1922","hits":1929},{"value":"2007","hits":1715},{"value":"2008","hits":1664},{"value":"2011","hits":1661},{"value":"2009","hits":1624},{"value":"2019","hits":1623},{"value":"2015","hits":1613},{"value":"2013","hits":1604},{"value":"2010","hits":1601},{"value":"2014","hits":1567},{"value":"2012","hits":1553},{"value":"1919","hits":1533},{"value":"1918","hits":1531}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":506439,"missing":56},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"photographs","hits":10710},{"value":"correspondence","hits":9628},{"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":2771},{"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":41201},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":17721},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8830},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":7090},{"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":145},{"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":8153},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":4251},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":4102},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3854},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3438},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3292},{"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":2785},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":2264}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":81102},{"value":"Collection","hits":455}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":81360},{"value":"true","hits":197}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}