{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0206","title":"Oral history interview with Sam Holton, March 28, 2001","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Matthews, Jenny Lynn","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Durham County, Durham, 35.99403, -78.89862","United States, North Carolina, Orange County, 36.0613, -79.1206","United States, North Carolina, Orange County, Carrboro, 35.91014, -79.07529","United States, North Carolina, Orange County, Chapel Hill, 35.9132, -79.05584"],"dcterms_creator":["Holton, Samuel M., 1922-"],"dc_date":["2001-03-28"],"dcterms_description":["Sam Holton discusses the Chapel Hill school board's efforts to desegregate its public schools. In 1968, after serving as PTA president, he was elected to the school board. There he was immediately faced with escalating racial tensions following the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. --tensions that were also felt in the newly constructed and integrated Chapel Hill High School. The school failed to incorporate the traditions of the former all-black Lincoln High School, which increased blacks' feelings of marginality. The inclusion of blacks into the Chapel Hill High student culture and the high numbers of disciplinary infractions for black students eventually fueled altercations between whites and blacks, say Holton. He explains how school board members sought ways to accommodate low-income students and blacks, including curricular and extracurricular offerings. A professor of education at the University of North Carolina, Holton also provides a socioeconomic analysis of achievement gaps. He contends that students' low test achievement scores can be directly correlated to the educational level and economic class of their parents. Although a large divide exists between upper-class and low-income Chapel Hill residents, Holton is careful to argue that Chapel Hill is not racist. He insists that the local school board remains committed to the education of all students. He stresses that racial and economic balance in Chapel Hill schools is necessary to prevent middle-class whites from abandoning public schools. Without middle-class white support, Holton implies, a quality education for blacks would not exist.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["School integration--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","African Americans--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (N.C.). Board of Education","Race riots--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Segregation in education--North Carolina--Durham","Chapel Hill High School (Chapel Hill, N.C.)","School board members--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Chapel Hill (N.C.)--Race relations"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Sam Holton, March 28, 2001"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0206/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Title from menu page (viewed on November 13, 2008).","Interview participants: Sam Holton, interviewee; Jenny Matthews, interviewer.","Duration: 01:22:28.","This electronic edition is part of the UNC-Chapel Hill digital library, Documenting the American South. It is a part of the collection Oral histories of the American South.","Text encoded by Jennifer Joyner. Sound recordings digitized by Aaron Smithers."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Holton, Samuel M., 1922-2010"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0208","title":"Oral history interview with Fran Jackson, March 23, 2001","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Broadnax, Christa","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Orange County, 36.0613, -79.1206","United States, North Carolina, Orange County, Chapel Hill, 35.9132, -79.05584"],"dcterms_creator":["Jackson, Fran"],"dc_date":["2001-03-23"],"dcterms_description":["Fran Jackson attended Northside Elementary until her parents petitioned for her transfer to the integrated Guy B. Phillips Junior High School. She argues that her parents and other black adults supported integration because better resources would be available to black students. Her parents' dedication to integration included paying for cab rides to and from the integrated school. Jackson herself, however, was less enthusiastic about integration. She enjoyed the assortment of extracurricular activities and caring teachers at Northside Elementary but felt isolated from the other white students and the predominantly white faculty. After graduating from high school in the late 1960s, she made a conscious choice to attend a historically black school, Johnson C. Smith University. There she adopted Afrocentric ideas, which she shared with her younger sisters, who helped lead the student call for more black teachers, the inclusion of black school traditions, and the creation of a black studies curriculum at Chapel Hill High School. Jackson also describes what she views as the hypocrisy of Chapel Hill's liberalism. She argues that tight racial and class boundaries maintained white privilege and that school desegregation hastened the demise of black cultural institutions.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["School integration--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","African Americans--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Chapel Hill (N.C.)--Race relations--20th century","African American students--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","High schools--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","African Americans--Social conditions"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Fran Jackson, March 23, 2001"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0208/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Title from menu page (viewed on Nov. 14, 2008).","Interview participants: Fran Jackson, interviewee; Christa Broadnax, interviewer.","Duration: 00:55:04.","This electronic edition is part of the UNC-Chapel Hill digital library, Documenting the American South. It is a part of the collection Oral histories of the American South.","Text encoded by Jennifer Joyner. Sound recordings digitized by Aaron Smithers."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Jackson, Fran"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcri_bcri-ohpc_63","title":"Joel S. Boykin Jr.","collection_id":"bcri_bcri-ohpc","collection_title":"Birmingham Civil Rights Institute Oral History Project Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2001-03-22"],"dcterms_description":["Joel S. Boykin Jr. discusses participating in the Movement after attending Morehouse and dental school. Dr. Boykin bailed demonstrators out of jail while his wife directed the Office of Economic Opportunity."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Alabama--Birmingham","Morehouse College (Atlanta, Ga.)","Office of Economic Opportunity"],"dcterms_title":["Joel S. Boykin Jr."],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Birmingham Civil Rights Institute (Birmingham, Ala.)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://bcriohp.org/items/show/63"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Shuttlesworth, Fred L., 1922-2011","King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1112","title":"Little Rock School District Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Compliance Report","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["2001-03-15"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational statistics","School discipline","School employees","School improvement programs","School integration","Student activities","Student assistance programs","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring"],"dcterms_title":["Little Rock School District Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Compliance Report"],"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/1112"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nPROPERTY OF O0M LIBRARY RECEIVED M.4R 1 ~ 200! OriiGEGF Little Rock School District Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Compliance Report March 15, 2001 TABLE OF CONTE:\\'TS INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... I\\\" C0:\\1PLIANCE REPORT .................................................................................. 1 I. Good Faith Section 2.1 ............................................................................... 1 Section2.l.l ............................................................................... 3 II. Facultv and Staff III. IV. V. Section 2.2 ................................................................................ 5 Section 2.2.1 ........................................................................... 5 Section 2.2.2 .............................................................................. 7 Section 2.2.3 .............................................................................. 8 Section 2.2.4 ............................................................................... 9 Section 2.2.5 ............................................................................ 9 Section 2.2.6 ............................................................................ 9 Section2.2.7 ........................................................................... 14 Student Assignment Section 2.3 ......................................................................... 15 Section 3.6 ......................................................................... 18 Special Education and Related Programs Section 2.4 ............................... .-.......................................... 20 Discipline Section 2.5 ........................................................................... 24 Section 2.5 .1 ............................................................................ 25 Section 2.5.2 ........................................................................ 25 Section 2.5.3 ......................................................................... 25 Section 2.5.4 .......................................................................... 26 VI. Extracurricular Activities Section 2.6 ......................................................................... 27 Section 2.6.3 ............................................................................... 29 VII. Advanced Placement Courses and the Gifted and Talented Program Section 2.6.1 ........................................................................ 30 Section 2.6.2 ........................................................................ 30 VII. Academic Achievement A. Generally Section 2. 7 ...................................................................... 51 B. Transition to Middle Schools Section 3.4 .................................................................... 66 C. Early Childhood Education Section 5.1 ........................................................................ 72 D. Reading and Language Arts Section 5.2 ...................................................................... 75 Primary Grades Section 5.2.1 ...................................................................... 75 Section 5.2.l(a) ......................................................... 77 Section 5.2.l(b) ......................................................... 77 Section 5.2.l(c) ......................................................... 77 --------------~- Section 5.2.l(d) ........................................ ................. 78 Section 5.2.l(e) ......................................................... 78 Section 5.2.l(f) ................... . ....................... . .............. 79 Section 5 .2.1 (g) ....................... .................................. 79 Section 5.2.1 (h) .................................... : .................... 80 Section 5 .2.1 (i) .......................................................... 80 Section 5.2.l(j) .......................................................... 81 Section 5 .2.1 (k) ......................................................... 90 Section 5 .2.1 (I) .......................................................... 90 Intermediate Grades Section 5.2.2 ..................................................................... 93 Section 5.2.2(a) ......................................................... 94 Section 5.2.2(b) ......................................................... 94 Section 5.2.2(c) .......................................................... 95 Section 5.2.2(d) .......................................................... 95 Section 5.2.2(e) .......................................................... 95 Section 5.2.2() .......................................................... 96 Section 5.2.2(g) ......................................................... 96 Section 5.2.2(h) ........................................................ 102 Secondary Schools E. Section5.2.3 ..................................................................... 105 Section 5.2.3(a) ........................................................ 107 Section 5.2.3(b) ........................................................ 108 Section 5 .2.3( c) ........................................................ 108 Section 5.2.3(d) ........................................................ 109 Section 5.2.3(e) ........................................................ 109 Section 5.2.3() ............................................... ...... : ... 111 Mathematics F. Section 5.3 ...................................................................... 115 Section 5.3.1 ..................................................................... 115 Section 5.3.2 ..................................................................... 125 Section 5.3.3 ..................................................................... 125 Section 5.3.4 ..................................................................... 126 Section 5.3.5 ..................................................................... 129 Computer Literacy G. H. Section 5.4 ....................................................................... 136 Alternative Educational Opportunities Section5.6.l ..................................................................... 145 Program Evaluation IX. Section2.7.l ...................................................................... 148 Parental Involvement Section 2.8 ................................................................................ 149 ii I ~ I I I I I I I I I I X. Equitable Allocation of Resources Section.2.9 ............................................................................ 158 Section 2.10 .......................................................................... 158 XI. Guidance and Counseling Section 2.11 ............................................................................... 160 Section 2.11.1 ......................................................................... 160 Section 5.8 ........................................................................... 162 XII. Cultural Sensitivity Section 2.12 .............................................................................. 163 Section 2.12.1 ............................................................................ 163 Section 2.12.2 ......................................................................... 165 XIII. Compliance Section 2.13 ............................................................................ 166 APPENDIX Resource Allocation Review (Three-year Comparison and 2000-01 Correlation Analysis) Dedicated Millage Projects Proposed Bond Projects iii INTRODUCTIO'.\\' The Little Rock School District (hereinafter \"LRSD\" or \"'District\") submits this Compliance Report in accordance with Section 11 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (\"Revised Plan\"). On March 15, 2000, the District filed with the Court an Interim Compliance Report. The purpose of the Interim Compliance Report was to advise the Court, the other parties to this case, and interested persons of the status of the District's efforts to meet its obligations under the Revised Plan and to develop a format for this report. The District asked the parties and other interested persons to provide comments or suggestions with regard to the substance and format of the Interim Compliance Report. It received none. Accordingly, this report will follow a similar format as the Interim Compliance Report. The Interim Compliance Report cataloged the programs, policies and procedures implemented by the District in an effort to comply with the Revised Plan. To avoid duplication, the Interim Compliance Report is hereby incorporated by reference. The programs, policies and procedures implemented by the District and identified in the Interim Compliance Report will not be repeated in this report. Where there is nothing new to report, this report will simply refer the reader to the Interim Compliance Report. This report assumes that the reader is familiar with the Interim Compliance Report. This report will vary in one significant respect from the Interim Compliance Report. The Interim Compliance Report included information related to every substantive section of the Revised Plan. This resulted in some redundancy within that report. This report attempts to avoid this redundancy by focusing on the core obligations contained in Section 2 of the Revised Plan. This report is divided into thirteen sections, each of which correlates to a Section 2 obligation. Other sections of the Revised Plan are discussed along with the underlying Section 2 obligation. Effort has been made to refer the reader to other related sections of the report rather than iv repeating information in multiple sections. A table of contents also has been added to assist readers in finding information based on either subject area or section number. Finally, this report was prepared for the Board of Directors (\"Board\") by the District's Compliance Committee. However, it reflects the hard work of a large group of dedicated District employees, including administrators, principals, teachers, counselors and other staff members. While that group is too large for individual acknowledgement, their efforts are greatly appreciated and should not go without mention. Thank you. Compliance Committee V COMPLIANCE REPORT I. Good Faith. Section 2.1 LRSD shall in good faith exercise its best efforts to comply with the Constitution, to remedy the effects of past discrimination by LRSD against African-American students, to ensure that no person is discriminated against on the basis of race, color or ethnicity in the operation of LRSD and to provide an equal educational opportunity for all students attending LRSD schools. The Covenant During the term of this Revised Plan, the District attempted to demonstrate its good faith by meeting its plan obligations. As the term of the Revised Plan nears its end, the District sought a means to manifest its good faith commitment for the future. On January 11, 2001, the Board adopted a \"Covenant for the Future\" (hereinafter \"Covenant\"). In the Covenant, the Board promised to continue to exercise its best efforts to:  improve the academic achievement of all students,  comply with the Constitution, and ensure that no person is discriminated against on the basis of race, color or ethnicity in the operation of the District, and  provide equitable educational resources, programs and opportunity in a nondiscriminatory environment for all students attending District schools. On January 12, 2001, the District brought together administrators from every school in the District to affirm the Covenant. Participants were presented with the Covenant and then asked to outline strategies to be implemented at their respective schools to fulfill the promises made in the Covenant. Participants were later required to share the Covenant with their Campus Leadership Teams (\"CL Ts\"). Campus Leadership Teams and Total Quality Management The District's success in fulfilling the promises set forth in the Covenant will in large measure depend on the continued success of the CLTs. The CLT program was at the heart of the District's efforts to meet its obligations under the Revised Plan. Since their formation in 1998, the CL Ts have provided the horsepower driving the District's efforts to improve student achievement. They derive their power from the philosophy of Total Quality Management (\"TQM\"). TQM stresses four basic principals: continuous improvement, continuous education, customer satisfaction and data-driven decisions. Training in TQM has been a top priority for the District. Training began during the 1998-99 school year. Principals meet monthly for TQM group study sessions. The CL Ts, including principals, and the Cluster Coordinating Committees conduct a monthly-\"leadership\" meeting. The Cluster Coordinating Committees also meet quarterly. Dr. Terrence Roberts has provided additional professional development to school principals and the CLTs. In October 2000, high school principals and some administrators involved in the TQM initiative attended the National Quality Conference in Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina. All principals have had an opportunity to receive additional TQ\n,.,.1 training thro ugh a series of four-day intensive training sessions conducted by the Arkansas Leadership Academy in the summer of 2000. This training has continued during the 2000-01 school year with two-day training sessions in November 2000 and February 2001 and with rigorous \"homework\" assignments in the interim. During the 1998-99 school year, the District sought to be formally recognized as a quality school district by the Arkansas Quality Award (\"AQA\"), a non-profit agency formed to provide opportunities for interested organizations in the state to measure their progress toward quality. AQA's team of examiners scrutinized the District using the nationally recognized Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Program criteria. These criteria are considered to be organizational best practices and are the foundation for developing and integrating all processes in an organization's operation. The award criteria are divided into seven categories that reflect the major areas for organizations to develop and improve: Leadership, Strategic Planning, Customer and Market Focus, Information and Analysis, Human Resource Focus, Process Management, and Business Results. There are four quality award levels: Level 1 -- Quality Interest Award: For an organization expressing an interest in adopting and applying quality principles. Recognition is given to any organization completing the basic elements associated with quality awareness and understanding. Level 2 -- Quality Commitment Award: For an organization that has advanced from the knowledge and skills gained from initial steps and has a plan to move the organization toward total quality improvement and has progressed to a point of potential serious commitment. Level 3 -- Quality Achievement Award: For an organization that has demonstrated significant progress in building sound and notable processes through its cornmitme~t and practice of quality principles. Level 4 -- Governor's Quality Award: For an organization which is an outstanding example of a quality organization in the state of Arkansas exhibiting \"World Class\" processes which serve as a role model for others. In the fall of 1999, the District received the \"Quality Interest Award.\" In the feedback report, the examiners wrote: Overall, this applicant has established a strong initial process to achieve performance excellence . . .. Substantial planning and training have taken place and the organization is clearly committed to the process .... Significantly, the success of this particular organization will be applauded as a success for the organization and for the State as a whole. 2 Motivated by this positive feedback, the District submitted its second application to AQA in the spring of 2000. Last fall, AQA awarded the District the Quality Commitment A\\\\'ard. The A.QA. provided the following feedback: [T]he applicant has a systematic approach that is responsive to the basic purposes of Leadership, Strategic Planning, Customer and Market Focus, Information and Analysis, Human Resource Focus, Process Management, and Business Results: The early stages of developing trends and obtaining comparative information are evident from the data that are presented .... Work systems are designed to promote cooperation and collaboration by the use of work teams, teacher teams, cluster teams, and Campus Leadership Teams. This applicant's approach to education and training balances both short and longer term goals by providing professional development for certified personnel geared toward successful implementation of new initiatives .... Currently, the District is reviewing AQA's feedback and compiling data in preparation for submitting its application for the \"Quality Achievement Award.\" A quality school district meets the needs of all students. In adopting the CLT program, the District committed itself to providing each school the leadership and autonomy necessary to meet the needs of each school's unique student population. With that autonomy comes a responsibility to ensure the success of each student. The TQM training provided by the District to principals and CL Ts represents an effort to ensure that they are equipped to meet that responsibility. Section 2.1.1 LRSD shall retain a desegregation and/or education expert approved by the JoshuaIntervenors to work with LRSD in the development of the programs, policies and procedures to be implemented in accordance with this Revised Plan and to assist LRSD in devising remedies to problems concerning desegregation or racial discrimination which adversely affect African-American students. Dr. Terrence Roberts continues to assist the District in meeting its plan obligations by:  Consulting with teachers, counselors, and administrators\n Reviewing programs, policies and/or procedures\n Identifying areas in need of reshaping and problem solving\n Providing methods for maintaining District goals and focus\n Aiding in future projections to address the District needs and strategies for improvement\n Developing the \"Leaming to Cope With Difference\" employee training program\n Meeting with individuals and groups to rethink and/or affirm their commitment and personal development plan\n Working to establish a level of enthusiasm toward personal commitment, growth, and development\nand 3  Seeking to formulate the concept that each individual \\\\ ould be so committed to personal growth that results would be seen District-wide, resulting in the District becoming a positive model for our nation. Likewise, Dr. Steven Ross continues to assist the District in meeting its plan obligations by:  Consulting with Department of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (\"PRE\") and the Director of Federal Programs on the evaluation of Title I programs\n Advising PRE staff on school profiles\n Planning with PRE regarding program evaluation models\n Assisting the Superintendent and PRE in determining appropriate categories of data to present in order to determine whether there has been improvement in student achievement\n Reviewing drafts of data reports for program evaluation\n Discussing data reports with PRE staff and making suggestions for improvement\n Meeting with the Compliance Committee to discuss program evaluation issues\n Providing assistance in securing a consultant for outsourcing some program evaluation responsibilities\nand  Making a presentation to the Board on program evaluation and the formation of a research committee. 4 II. Facultv and Staff. Section 2.2 LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure that LRSD hires, assigns, utilizes and promotes qualified African-Americans in a fair and equitable manner. Total Administrative Staff The overall percentage of African-American administrative staff increased from 48.86 percent to 50.29 percent from 1998-99 through 2000-01. While the number of African-American administrators has remained relatively constant (86, 84, 86), the number of white administrators has decreased slightly each year (90, 89, 85). There has been no change in the racial composition of assistant and associate superintendents (three African-American and four white/other). Total Administrative Staff Year African-American White/Other Percent A-A* 1998-1999 86 90 48.86% 1999-2000 84 89 48.55% 2000-2001 86 85 50.29% * African-Arnencan will be abbreviated \"A-A\" where necessary because of space Iurutat1ons. Building Level Administrators The majority of building level administrators continues to be African-American with a slight increase in the percentage of African-American administrators in the 2000-01 school year. In schools with more than one administrator, the District attempts to maintain racial diversity among administrators where practicable and consistent with other legal requirements. Building Level Administrators Year African-American White/Other Percent A-A 1998-1999 55 46 54.5% 1999-2000 55 46 54.5% 2000-2001 57 42 57.6% Section 2.2.1 LRSD shall maintain in place its current policies and practices relating to the recruitment of African-American teachers which have allowed LRSD to maintain a teaching staff which is approximately one-third African-American. The District continues to aggressively and successfully recruit qualified African-American teachers. From July 1, 2000, through September 1, 2000, there were 198 full-time teachers hired, 42 percent of whom were African-American. As the table below demonstrates, this raised 5 the District 's percentage of African-American teachers to 3 percent, up from 37 percent in the 1997-98 school year. Total District Teachers Year African-American White/Other Percent A-A 1997-1998 704 1205 37% 1998-1999 728 1192 38% 1999-2000 719 1218 37% 2000-2001 757 1208 39% Recruiting and Retaining Teachers The District's success in recruiting and retaining African-American teachers has not been matched by the other school districts in Pulaski County. Twenty-one percent of the Pulaski County Special School District's certfied staff and 18 percent of the North Little Rock School District's certified staff are African-American. Even so, all of the districts are doing a good job in this regard considering that only 8 percent of college graduates in Arkansas are AfricanAmerican. During the 2000-2001 school year, 84 percent of District recruitment binders were issued to African-Americans. Recruitment binders are advanced commitment agreements enabling applicants to be assured of employment. New recruitment and retention strategies being implemented or developed include:  Tuition assistance programs for full-time students to complete their undergraduate degree, for full-time students to complete a master's degree and for non-certified employees to obtain an undergraduate degree\n The Teachers of Tomorrow Program which provides scholarships to District high school graduates interested in becoming teachers\n Waiver of the tenure requirement for tuition reimbursement for African-American teachers willing to complete an additional certification in a critical supply area\nand  Arkansas New Teacher Mentor Program which partners first year teachers with master teachers. Desegregation of Teaching Staffs The District has also sought to ensure desegregation of the teaching staff at each school. It has measured success in this regard by looking at the number of schools whose percentage of African-American teachers is within plus or minus 15 percentage points (+/-15%) of the overall percentage of African-American teachers at that grade level. As the table below demonstrates, three schools fall outside +/- 15% measure at the elementary level. This is down from seven in 1998-99 school year. At the secondary level, only one school, Metropolitan Career Technical Center, remains outside the +/-15% measure, compared to four schools in the 1998-99 school year. 6 Year 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 Year 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001 Section 2.2.2 Percentage Of Elementary Schools Within+ / -15% Of Overall ElementanRacial Composition Total Schools Schools Inside Range 36 29 36 29 36 31 36 33 % Of Secondary Schools Within+ / -15% Of Overall Elementary Racial Composition Total Schools Schools Inside Range 15 12 15 11 15 13 15 14 Percent Inside Range 81% 81% 86% 92% Percent Inside Range 80% 73% 87% 93% LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to increase the number of African-American media specialists, guidance counselors, early childhood teachers, primary grade teachers and secondary core subject teachers, including offering incentives for African-American teachers to obtain certification in these areas, and to assign those teachers to the LRSD schools where the greatest disparity exists. The District's efforts at increasing the number of African-American media specialists, guidance counselors, early childhood teachers, primary grade teachers and secondary core subject teachers have met with modest success. While the percentage of African-Americans in these areas has increased, the increase has been small, as shown in the tables below. Media Specialists Year African-American White/Other Percent A-A 1997 8 44 14% 1998 8 I 43 16% 1999 8 43 16% 2000 9 43 17% 7 Counselors Year African-American White/Other Percent A-A 1997 36 48 43% 1998 39 49 44% 1999 39 49 44% 2000 40 49 45% Core Secondary Year African-American White/Other Percent A-A 1997 156 230 40% 1998 179 227 44% 1999 189 249 43% 2000 206 259 44% Earlv Childhood Year African-American White/Other Percent A-A 1997 40 104 28% 1998 47 116 29% 1999 47 109 30% 2000 46 107 30% Primary Grade Teachers Year African-American White/Other Percent A-A 1997 94 186 34% 1998 92 180 34% 1999 92 198 32% 2000 105 197 35% Section 2.2.3 LRSD shall establish a uniform salary schedule for all positions within the District, including a salary range for director and associate and assistant superintendent positions, designed to provide compensation in accordance with qualifications and to minimize complaints of favoritism. See Interim Compliance Report filed March 15, 2000. 8 L Section 2.2.4 LRSD shall implement a policy for the centralized hidng and assignment of teachers b) the LRSD Human Resources Department designed to provide an equitable distribution of teaching resources and to prevent nepotism and pre-selection by a school principal. See Interim Compliance Report filed March 15, 2000. Section 2.2.5 LRSD shall implement a policy of promotion from within which shall include procedures for notifying District employees of open positions. Over the last three years, between 62 percent and 71 percent of administrative positions have been filled by promoting existing District employees. The percentage of African-Americans promoted has roughly mirrored the percentage of African-Americans in the District as a whole. Administrative Positions Filled Via Promotion Year Vacancies Promotions Percent Promotions 1998-99 15 10 67% 1999-00 1.7 12 71% 2000-01 13 8 62% Section 2.2.6 LRSD shall implement programs, policies and /or procedures designed to ensure that the teaching staffs at all LRSD schools are substantially similar with regard to average years of experience and percentage of teachers with advanced degrees. The District decided not to require involuntary transfers in order to meet this obligation. Rather, the District compiled data on each school's average years of teaching experience, percentage of teachers with advanced degrees and percentage of teachers with a master's degree and nine or more years of experience. These data are provided in the tables below. Principals were expected to take this information into account when making hiring recommendations. Average Years of Experience The average length of service of teachers by school ranges from 6.65 years (Baseline) to 16.74 (McDermott) in the elementary schools\n6.95 years (Mabelvale) to 12.96 years (Henderson) in the middle schools\nand 7.9 years (McClellan) to 13.96 years (Parkview) in the high schools. 9 Average Years of Experience Elementarv School 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 Badgett 11.63 10.26 8.29 Bale 11.88 12.24 10.81 Baseline 10.52 9.29 6.65 Booker 14.29 13.04 12.62 Brady 11.38 11.54 12. 71 Carver 10.85 10.10 10.12 Cloverdale 12.96 12.70 12.32 Charter NIA NIA 3.00 Chicot 11.69 10.00 9.07 Dodd 8.77 8.94 8.05 Fair Park 16.00 17.16 14.89 Franklin 10.30 8.73 10.00 Forest Park 12.44 10.95 9.95 Fulbright 15.51 13.60 13.64 Garland 9.50 Closed Closed Geyer Springs 10.60 10.47 11.36 Gibbs 12.25 12.45 12.52 Jefferson 15.06 15.42 14.08 King 11.40 11.97 10.95 McDermott 16.25 17.32 16.74 Meadowc!iff 14.80 12.95 14.68 Mitchell 7.63 6.77 7.38 Mabel vale 11.06 11.25 11 .23 Otter Creek 12.28 11.44 9.21 Pulaski Heights 10.72 11.35 9.41 Rightsell 11.33 11.04 7.38 Rockefeller 9.86 9.76 10.19 Romine 15.29 14.37 15.92 Stephens Closed Closed 6.85 Terry 13.23 11.71 12.79 Wakefield 15.80 15.17 15.61 Washington 10.47 9.32 9.31 Watson 10.39 9.95 9.45 Western Hills 14.77 13.35 12.50 Williams 16.51 16.09 14.79 Wilson 13.70 12.72 13.67 Woodruff 9.18 7.00 7.38 Secondary School 1998-99 1999-::?000 ! 2000-01 Middle Schools Cloverdale Middle 9.84 8.62 -8.36 Dunbar 10.02 8.54 7.42 Forest Heights 12.78 10.50 10.16 Henderson 12.88 13.27 12.96 Mann 12.92 12.38 12.19 Mabelvale Middle 7.90 8.55 6.95 Pulaski Heights 14.84 10.23 9.73 Southwest 10.16 10.22 10.40 High Schools Central 14.54 11.66 12.04 Fair 12.17 9.03 8.84 Hall 14.48 11.94 11.37 McClellan 9.67 8.59 7.90 Metro 14.26 13.81 14.72 Parkview 15.36 14.38 13.96 Percentage of Teachers with Advanced Degrees The table below provides the percentage of teachers with advanced degrees at each District school for the last three school years. Elementary schools have so few teachers that looking only at the percentage of teachers with advanced degrees can be misleading. A school's percentage can change substantially with the change of only a few teachers. At the middle and high school levels, the alternative schools and Metropolitan High School have the lowest percentage of teachers with advanced degrees. The alternative schools' percentages may be explained by the relative newness of those staffs. Metropolitan's percentage is low due to the nature of the vocational subjects being taught. There simply are not many advanced degrees in those areas. Percentage of Teachers with Advanced Degrees Elementary School 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 Badgett 57% 47% 60% Bale 56% 40% 58% Baseline 61% 52% 38% Booker 63% 54% 56% Brady 63o/cl 58% 50% Carver 55% 50% 50% Cloverdale Elem. 54% 52% 52% Chicot 49% 50% 48% 11 Dodd 50% -1-t 52% Fair Park 62% 5S 0 0 I 50~-o I Franklin 36% 36% I 41% Forest Park 47% 50% 50% Fulbright 56% 54% i 58% Garland 29% 42% Closed Geyer Springs 62% 40% 33% Gibbs 65% 59% 63% Jefferson 74% 74% 74% King 52% 41% 42% McDermott 50% 44% 48% Meadowcliff 46% 42% 40% Mitchell 57% 40% 38% Mabel vale 42% 24% 23% Otter Creek 64% 54% 64% Pulaski Heights Elem. 56% 71% 55% Rightsell 65% 54% 32% Rockefeller 49% 41% 45% Romine 41% 45% 48% Stephens Closed Closed 40% Teny 45% 50% 50% Wakefield 71% 67% 71% Washington 47% 38% 37% Watson 53% 55% 52% Wes tern Hills 52% 55% 60% Williams 80% 76% 57% Wilson 75% 70% 68% Woodruff 44% 45% 48%, Secondary School 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 Middle Schools Cloverdale Middle 48% 38% 32% Dunbar 69% 56% 50% Forest Heights 55% 48% 40% Henderson 41% 48% 40% Mann 54% 54% 59% Mabelvale Middle 47% 51% 50% Pulaski Heights Middle 56% 45% 47% Southwest 56% 51% 50% ACC- Metro 67% 59% 67% ALT Agency 25% 40% 25% ALC 62% 53% 47% High Schools 12 Central 69% 62% 63% Fair 61% . 60% 5 -o , ) / 0 Hall 60% 54% 56% McClellan 50% 44% 49% Metropolitan 37% 28% 23% Parkview 75% 67% 71% Master's Plus Nine The District also compiled data on the percentage of teachers with a master's degree and nine or more years of experience since this was the measure used in the District's resource allocation review. See Section 2.9. The percentage of teachers with a master's degree and nine or more years of experience ranges from 19 percent (Mabelvale) to 67 percent (Wakefield) in the elementary schools\n27 percent (Cloverdale and Forest Heights) to 52 percent (Mann) in the middle schools\nand 35 percent (McClellan) to 55 percent (Parkview) in the high schools. Overall, there are 40 schools where more than 33 percent of the teachers have a master's degree and nine or more years of experience . . Master's Degree Plus Nine or More Years of Experience Elementary School 1998-99 ..  1999-2000 2000-01 Badgett 10/28 36% 8/17 47% 8/15 53% Bale 15/36 42% 12/35 34% 11/26 42% Baseline 13/36 36% 12/27 44% 10/26 38% Booker 23/59 39% 20/52 38% 24/55 44% Brady 14/30 47% 10/26 38% 10/26 38% Carver 19/47 40% 14/44 32% 15/42 36% Cloverdale Elem. 12/37 32% 10/29 34% 9/27 33% Chicot 14/43 33% 13/42 31% 14/42 33% Dodd 9/28 32% 8/20 40% 9/21 43% Fair Park 11/26 42% 10/19 53% 10/20 50% Franklin 11/45 24% 11/45 24% 13/41 32% Forest Park 9/64 14% 7/26 27% 8/22 36% Fulbright 16/41 39% 15/35 43% 14/31 45% Garland 4/25 16% 6/26 24% Closed Geyer Springs 13/34 38% 10/25 40% 6/21 29% Gibbs 12/31 39% 14/29 48% 15/27 56% Jefferson 22/39 56% 17/27 63% 17/27 63% King 19/52 ,37% 17/46 37% 18/45 40% McDermott 12/38 32% 10/27 37% 10/27 37% Meadowcliff 11/26 42% 7/19 37% 9/25 36% Mitchell 9/28 32% 7/25 28% 7/24 29% Mabelvale 7/36 19% 5/29 17% 5/26 19% 13 Otter Creek 11/28 39% 11 26 42% 12/25 48% Pulaski Heights Elem. 13/36 36% 12 23 52~0 I I 10 22 -+) ~o Rightsell 10/23 43% 11 '2-+ 46% 5/28 18% Rockefeller 11 /43 28% 11/39 28% 12/38 32% Romine 11 /32 34% 11 /29 38% 11 /27 41% Stephens Closed Closed 9/30 30% Terry 12/31 39% 13/40 33% 14/36 39% Wakefield 17/28 61% 14/27 52% 16/24 67% Washington 18/34 53% 17/55 31% 17/51 33% Watson 12/60 20% 12/13 92% 13/31 42% W estem Hills 10/23 43% 10/20 50% 9/20 45% Williams 25/41 61% 23/34 68% 23/35 66% Wilson 17/32 53% 14/23 61% 15/25 60% Woodruff 5/27 19% 7/22 32% 8/21 38% Secondary School 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 Middle Schools Cloverdale Middle 16/54 30% 15/56 27% 16/60 27% Dunbar 28/68 41% 22/63 35% 19/62 31% Forest Heights 22/64 34% 18/65 28% 17/63 27% Henderson 18/63 29% 21/61 34% 19/60 32% Mann 30/59 51% 29/61 48% 34/66 52% Mabelvale Middle 17/53 32% 18/47 38% 18/48 38% Pulaski Heights Middle 30/61 49% 25/62 40% 23/58 40% Southwest 18/54 33% 20/55 36% 21/56 38% ACC- Metro 7/12 59% 8/16 50% 10/21 48% ALT Agency 0/4 0% 1/5 20% 1/17 1% ALC NIA 4/15 27% 3/17 18% High Schools . Central 60/108 56% 60/135 44% 64/125 51% Fair 27/67 40% 28/75 37% 27/75 36% Hall 36/70 51% 39/102 38% 44/102 43% McClellan 30/78 38% 31/91 34% 32/91 35% Metropolitan 7/19 37% 5/18 28% 5/22 23% Parkview 37/67 55% 43/87 49% 45/82 55% Section 2.2. 7 LRSD shall negotiate with the Knight lntervenors to establish a procedure for the mandatory reassignment of teachers as necessary to enable LRSD to meet its obligations under Section 2.2 of this Revised Plan. See Interim Compliance Report filed March 15, 2000. III. Student Assignment. 14 I I I Section 2.3 LRSD shall implement student assignment programs, policies and /or procedures designed to ensure the desegregation of LRSD schools to the extent practicable, including but not limited to Sections 3 and 4 of this Revised Plan. Policies Policy JC, School Attendance Zones, and JCA, Student Assignment, were approved and adopted by the Board on May 25, 2000. Overall Enrollment From the 1998-99 school year through the 2000-01 school year, the District's enrollment increased a total of 627 students, and the overall racial composition moved from 67 percent African-~erican to 68 percent African-American. Total Enrollment Year Total Enrollment Percent African-American 1998-99 24,898 67% 1999-2000 25,159 68% 2000-01 25,525 68% Enrollment by School The table on the following page shows the percentage of African-American students attending the District's schools for the years 1996-97 through the current school year. The District has used two measures to assess the degree of desegregation within the District. First, it has looked at the number ofracially isolated schools, defined as schools that are 90 percent or more AfricanAmerican. These schools are shaded in the table. While the number of racially isolated schools has increased from four to nine, this occurred with very little change in the racial composition at the affected schools. 15 Percentage African-American B, School Elementarv Schools School 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 Badgett 84 92 94 91 93 Bale 71 73 73 74 76 Baseline 80 83 84 85 84 Booker 52 52 49 51 55 Brady 64 63 65 71 75 Carver 51 52 51 52 53 Chicot 70 69 71 67 68 Cloverdale 88 92 93 89 89 Dodd 64 65 66 64 65 Fair Park 76 76 73 72 73 Forest Park 48 48 53 44 38 Franklin 91 92 94 96 97 Fulbright 53 48 57 41 40 Garland 92 93 93 94 closed Geyer Springs 75 75 78 82 86 Gibbs 51 52 50 52 52 Jefferson 42 44 45 39 42 King 53 54 52 55 54 Mabelvale 74 73 69 73 75 McDermott 57 57 59 57 53 Meadowcliff 76 79 78 79 74 Mitchell 95 92 95 98 97 Otter Creek 42 46 46 47 51 Pulaski Heights 54 55 55 57 53 Rightsell 96 94 96 97 99 Rockefeller 61 59 56 61 61 Romine 66 63 62 65 66 Stephens closed closed closed closed 94 Terry 45 46 52 46 46 Wakefield 88 86 87 84 81 Washington 55 53 52 61 60 Watson 82 89 94 94 95 Western Hills 70 70 73 75 74 Williams 52 52 52 51 52 Wilson 81 82 85 89 90 Woodruff 69 71 78 80 85 Total Elem. 65 65 67 68 68 16 Middle Schools - Middle Schools 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 Cloverdale 86 89 89 88 -- 86 Dunbar 58 57 59 60 59 Forest Heights 77 70 64 65 65 Henderson 82 86 88 76 76 Mabelvale 74 75 76 73 79 Mann 52 52 51 52 53 Pulaski Heights 59 57 62 60 56 Southwest 78 83 85  -.,:. --~--. , ...... 91 -\"J:v/ -~v\n: :. 92 Total Middle 69 69 70 69 69 High Schools High Schools 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 Central 62 59 59 57 55 Fair 79 81 82 80 80 Hall 72 71 70 71 72 McClellan 83 84 86 89 ...... _ -t ....\nf.\"l~~l:~..,--~o Parkview 52 51 51 50 51 Total H.S. 68 67 66 68 68 The District also looked at the number of schools within plus or minus 20 percentage points(+/- 20%) from the district-wide percentage African-American by organizational level. Twenty-three of the 35 elementary schools (66 percent) fall within the+/- 20%. Of the 12 remaining elementary schools, eight have an African-American population more than 20 percent above overall African-American percentage at the elementary level. The racial population at 11 of the 13 secondary schools (85 percent) remains within+/- 20% of the overall African-American percentage at the secondary level. While the number of schools outside the+/- 20% range increased under the Revised Plan, the increase occurred with very little change in the racial balance at the affected schools. Schools Outside +/- 20% Range Year Schools Outside Range 1996-97 9 1997-98 9 1998-99 I 11 1999-2000 15 2000-01 14 17 Assignment Options A significant number of the District 's students continue to take adrnntage of altcmati\\e assignment options provided by the District. In the current school year. 70 percent of high school students are attending their zone schools (80 percent if Parkview students are removed) and 75 percent of middle school students are attending their zone schools (83 percent if Mann students are removed). At the elementary level 62 percent of the students are attending their zone schools (68 percent if stipulation magnet students are removed). Not including students attending a Stipulation Magnet or attending school in another district based on an M-to-M transfer, 731 students are attending a school other than their zone school pursuant to the Revised Plan. In total, 20 percent of the District's students take advantage of an alternative assignment option available under the Revised Plan. The District's Stipulation Magnets remain a very attractive option. Enrollment has increased under the Revised Plan, as shown on the table below. Student numbers for the six Stipulation Magnets show growth and reflect a 2 percent increase over the past three years. Stipulation Magnet School Enrollment 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 3763 3787 3837 Similarly, students in Pulaski County continue to take advantage of the M-to-M Transfer program in large numbers, as shown in the table below. Although the number of incoming PCSSD students to elementary interdistrict magnets dropped, this was partly due in part to the middle school transition and grade restructuring. Summary of M-To-M Transfer Students NLR 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01. Sending 8 0 Receiving 65 27 PCSSD 0 21 Sending 482 399 366 Receiving 1310 1122 1128 LRSD Sending 1375 1149 1149 Receiving 490 399 366 Section 3.6 LRSD-shall construct at least two new area elementary schools, one in west Little Rock and one at the site of the former Stephens school. When the new Stephens Elementary opens, it shall receive additional funding as described in Section 5.5 of this Revised Plan and one or more of the schools identified in Section 5.5 will be closed. When a school identified in 18 Section 5.5 is closed, LRSD shall exercise its best efforts to find a community or educational use for the property. Otherwise, LRSD shall not seek-to close schools in African-American neighborhoods solely because of age or poor maintenance except when a new school will be located in the same general area. The new Stephens Elementary School held its first classes on January 8, 2001. It receives double funding in accordance with the current formula as described in the August 16, 1995, report of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. Plans for construction of an elementary school in west Little Rock are being developed. A site selection committee is currently investigating potential school sites. The first meeting of the West Little Rock School Site Selection Committee was held on February 5, 2001. 19 IV. Special Education and Related Programs. Section 2.4 LRSD shall implement programs, policies, and/or procedures designed to ensure that there is no racial discrimination in the referral and placement of students in special education or in other programs designed to meet special student needs. Policies The Board of Education revised Policy IKF, General Education Graduation Requirements, in December 2000. The revision included among the diploma-earning options, \"Diploma with waived or altered requirements established by an Individual Education Program (\"IEP\") team for a student identified with disabilities.\" Procedures A new \"504\" Handbook was distributed in fall 2000 to campus \"504\" coordinators and to selected central office staff to ensure greater consistency and equity in administering the \"504\" program. A group of secondary Advanced Placement (\"AP\") teachers was convened in fall 2000 to meet with the District's \"504\" supervisor in order to define reasonable accommodations for teachers of AP classes to employ in order to open access to the courses for \"504\" students. They agreed on a set of accommodations to pennit students with disabilities to participate in AP courses. A fonn was developed for the \"504\" committee to use in meeting with parents to establish agreedupon accommodations. The list of available accommodations was published in both the 2001-02 Middle School Curriculum Catalog and the 2001-02 High School Curriculum Catalog. Department staff worked throughout spring 2000 and fall 2000 with the English-as-a-Second Language (\"ESL\") Supervisor and consultant in establishing procedures for the screening/identification of limited-English proficient students who are referred for special education testing.  Programs School-Based Day Treatment Program The Division of Exceptional Children has instituted a school-based day treatment program consisting of two elementary classrooms at Romine Elementary staffed by two certified teachers and two paraprofessionals. The program is coordinated by a school psychology specialist and receives support services from a clinical therapist and psychiatrist provided by The Centers for Youth and Family. The purpose of the program is to provide a school-based placement option that is less restrictive than an off-campus day treatment program. The program addresses academic and social skills individually identified for each student. Students obtain the skills necessary to return to their home campuses and are afforded the opportunity to strengthen those skills by participating in regular classrooms at Romine. Language Arts In order to assure linkage of curriculum with specialized programs and to provide consistent and balanced literacy instruction for special education students, District reading materials and 20 curriculum implementation training were provided to all elementary special education teachers. along with general education teachers. Additionally, special education teachers have participated in the middle and high school teacher training on the implementation of the Reading and Writing Workshop in grades 6-9. Mathematics and Science All special education teachers have been trained in the implementation of both the mathematics and science curricula. Special education teachers share materials with the general education teachers in their building. Inclusion The Director for Exceptional Children was on the agenda for all three of the curriculum orientation workshops for counselors in January 2001. In his presentation he emphasized the importance of reducing the number of hours in which middle school special education students are served in the resource room to assure equitable exposure to the general education curriculum. He advised counselors to be prepared to place virtually all students who might formerly have been placed in resource room programs in the regular levels of Reading/Writing Workshop based on the IEP team's recommendations during annual reviews. He and the Director of Secondary Language Arts collaborated on the design of that curriculum and on professional development and determined that appropriate modifications could be made in the regular classroom for most special education students. Special education teachers have been informed of the curricular modifications and have been strongly encouraged to have IEP teams place students in regular Reading/Writing Workshop. School Psychology Specialists In 2000-01 the Department of Exceptional Children relocated to school sites the school psychology specialists. By placing school psychology specialists at school sites, they now:  participate on individual schools' Pupil Service Teams to provide technical assistance in pre-referral interventions to the general classroom teachers\n participate in pre-referral and referral conferences to assure students are not inappropriately referred for consideration of special education services\nand  are available to meet and confer with parents and staff regarding behavioral interventions for all students. In addition, the Department redistributed school assignments to school psychology specialists, assuring that no school psychology specialist serves more than three school sites. During fall 2000 the Department assigned three school psychology specialists specifically to middle schools to conduct activities outlined in the Safe School/Healthy Students grant proposal. Compliance Staff The Department recruited and hired compliance personnel to ensure that due process documentation is monitored and corrected for compliance and equity. 21 \"504\" Coordination A new District-level \"504\" supervisor was designated to provide technical assistance and training to school-based \"504\" coordinators, principals, and teachers to ensure that students are not inappropriately referred for consideration of special education services. Identified Students The following three tables are reports of ( 1) the numbers of identified students with disabilities for 1998-99, 1999-2000, and 2000-01 by race and gender\n(2) the numbers of identified students with mental retardation and learning disabilities, again by race and gender, for the same three years\nand (3) the numbers of special education students according to free/reduced lunch eligibility in 2000-01. Numbers ofldentified Students with Disabilities School Year A-A A-A White White Other Other Total Males Females Males Females Males Females 1998-99 1239 547 383 220 28 13 2430 Percents 51% 23% 16% 9% 1% 1% 1999-2000 1233 536 362 199 30 13 2373 Percents 52% 23% 15% 8% 1% 1% 2000-01 1257 584 379 193 39 22 2474 Percents 51% 24% 15% 8% 2% 1% Percents add up to more than I 00% due to roundmg. Numbers ofldentified Students with Mental Retardation and Learning Disabilities School Year A-A A-A White White Other Other Totals Males Females Males Females Males Females 1998-99 842 360 165 96 14 7 1484 Percents 57% 24% 11% 7% 1% 1% 1999-2000 839 369 160 87 14 7 1476 Percents 57% 25% 11% 6% 1% 1% 2000-01 873 399 144 74 21 12 1523 Percents 57% 26% 10% 5% 1% 1% Percents add up to more than JOO% due to rounding. Students Identified with Disabilities A-A A-A White White Other Other Totals Percents Status Males Females Males Females Males Females Free 855 399 63 33 15 12 1377 61% Reduced 79 32 23 15 0 2 151 1% Total ldent. 1257 584 379 193 39 22 2474 100% Free/Reduced 74% 74% 23% 25% 38% 64% Percent of Total Interpretations of this data are difficult since African-American students with disabilities are more likely to be enrolled in public education than are their white peers with disabilities. For instance, according to the December 2000 Child Count, there were 44 white students identified 22 with disabilities who were being educated either in private or home schools as compared to zero African-American children. Other factors impacting the relative percentage of AfricanAmerican students with disabilities are the disproportionate percentage of African-Americans who live in poverty and lower levels of pre-natal care among African-Americans. 23 V. Discipline. Section 2.5 LRSD shall implement programs, policies, and/or procedures designed to ensure that there is no racial discrimination with regard to student discipline. Overall, the number of disciplinary sanctions issued decreased by 21 percent from the 1997-98 school year through the 1999-2000 school year, as shown in the table below. For that same time period, the number of students committing offenses decreased 16 percent. Thus, fewer students are committing offenses, and those that do commit an offense are less likely to commit a second offense. Moreover, fewer than 2 percent of the students enrolled in the District were involved in violent offenses. Violent offenses are considered by the Arkansas Department of Education as incidents involving drugs, alcohol, student assaults, knives, handguns, rifles, shotguns, explosives, clubs, and gang activity. Overall Disciplinary Sanctions 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 Short Term 5486 5664 4865 4588 Suspensions Long Term 453 474 446 335 Suspensions Expulsions 82 109 1 3 TOTALS 6021 6247 5312 4926 Number of Students 3585 3672 3237 3011 Committing Offenses The number of African-American students suspended decreased 20 percent consistent with the overall reduction in disciplinary sanctions. The proportion of suspensions issued to AfricanAmerican students remained in the neighborhood of 85 percent. Suspensions By Race 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 Suspensions issued to African-American 5341 4470 4274 students Suspensions issued to White/ Other 906 842 652 students Total Suspensions 6247 5312 4926 The decrease in discipline sanctions has had a positive impact on parents' and teachers' perceptions of District schools. A survey of parents and teachers conducted during the 1999- 2000 school year revealed that 93 percent of African-American parents and 95 percent of white/other parents that expressed on opinion agreed that their child was safe at school. Ninetyone percent of both African-American and white/other parents that expressed an opinion agreed 24 that their child has a feeling of belonging at schools. Ninety-seven percent of African-American teachers and 96 percent of white/other teachers that expressed an opinion indicated that they felt safe at school. Section 2.5.1 LRSD shall strictly adhere to the policies set forth in the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook to ensure that all students are disciplined in a fair and equitable manner. Policy JBA, Nondiscrimination in Programs and Activities, and Regulation JI, Student Rights and Responsibilities, were approved and adopted by the Board on May 25, 2000. The policy and related regulations affirmed the District's ongoing commitment to make decisions involving students based on individual merit and free from discrimination in all its forms. Section 2.5.2 LRSD shall purge students' discipline records after the fifth grade and eighth grade of all offenses, except weapons offenses, arson and robbery, unless LRSD finds that to do so would not be in the best interest of the student. Building administrators purge students' discipline records at the end of each school year unless the student has been disciplined for an identified offense. In that case, the Student Hearing Office determines if it is in the best interest of the student for the records to be purged. Section 2.5.3 LRSD shall establish the position of \"ombudsman\" the job description for which shall include the following responsibilities: ensuring that students are aware of their rights pursuant to the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook, acting as an advocate on behalf of students involved in the discipline process, investigating parent and student complaints of race-based mistreatment and attempting to achieve equitable solutions. As a new position for the District, the ombudsman needed substantial training in order to fulfill his responsibilities. Since the position was established, the ombudsman has received training in conflict resolution (Fred Pryor Seminars), mediation (Center for Dispute Resolution, Austin, Texas), the role of an ombudsman (United States Ombudsman Association) and racial diversity (Dr. Terrence Roberts, \"Learning to Cope with Differences\"). In order to increase public awareness of the services available through the ombudsman, information about the ombudsman was disseminated by way of the District's cable network and printed publications. The ombudsman's rple in the discipline process has been included in the Student Rights and Responsibility Handbook, and the ombudsman made presentations at local churches, PT A, civic, and community meetings and participated in school/community activities, e.g., the Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association's Annual Fall Fest and the Magnet School Fair. 25 Efforts to raise public awareness of the ombudsman appear to h::iYe been successful. In the last year, the ombudsman has been contacted by over 358 parents and/or students. In addition, the ombudsman has implemented intervention activities at Badgett Elementary and McClellan High School designed to assist African-American males who demonstrate unacceptable behavior. Efforts are in place to expand these activities to include other schools. Section 2.5.4 LRSD shall work with students and their parents to develop behavior modification plans for students who exhibit frequent misbehavior. Behavior modification plans are developed by the Pupil Services Team or Educational Management Team. The Team typically includes the student, his or her parent, a building administrator, a counselor and one or more of the student's teachers. Others, such as the \"504\" Coordinator or a Special Education Supervisor, may be included depending on the student's individual needs. All members of the Team share responsibility for monitoring implementation of the behavior modification plan. 26 VI. Extracurricular Activities. Section 2.6 LRSD shaH implement programs, policies, and/or procedures designed to promote participation and to ensure that there are no barriers to participation by qualified AfricanAmericans in extracurricular activities, advanced placement courses, honors and enriched courses, and the gifted and talented program.  Extracurricular Activities Participation of African-Americans in extracurricular and co-curricular activities showed a significant increase through the 1999-2000 school year. Extracurricular activities are activities designed to provide opportunities for students to explore areas of interest that compliment and enrich the curriculum. These activities include athletics, clubs and organizations such as Student Council, Y-Teens, and Beta Club. As the table below demonstrates, the number of AfricanAmerican students participating in extracurricular activities increased 76 percent in the 1998-99 school year and an additional 26 percent in the 1999-2000 school year. Sixty-two percent of the District's African-American students participated in an extracurricular activity during the 1999- 2000 school year. Data for the 2000-01 school year are not yet available. Extracurricular Activity Participation A-A I W/O I A-A I W/O I A-A I 2335 I 393 I 4121 I 803 I 5203 I Co-Curricular Activities Extracurriclar Participation (Secondary) 4000 2000 0 African-American Participation a91.9s  98-99  99~0 W/O I 902 I African-American participation in co-curricular activities also showed an increase through the 1999-2000 school year. Co-curricular activities are activities designed to extend learning experiences through group or individual activities at school or public events, including band, orchestra, choir, or debate. As the table below demonstrates, the number of African-American students participating in co-curricular activities increased 9 percent in the 1998-99 school year and an additional 30 percent in the 1999-200 school year. Sixty-six percent of the District's African-American students participated in a co-curricular activity during the 1999-2000 school year. Data for the 2000-01 school year are not yet available. 27 Co-Curricular Activity Participation A-A I W/O I A-A I W/O I 2579 I 1222 I 2806 I u 15 I CO-CURRICULAR PARTICIPATION (SECONDARY) 2000 African-American Participation 11:198-99   99-00 -  00-01 A-A 3988 I W/O I I 1864 I The increased participation in extracurricular and co-curricular activities is likely the result of active recruitment by activity sponsors, coaches, principals, and the athletic director. School incentives and community involvement also played a role in increasing student interest and participation in activities. Specifically in terms of athletics, implementation by the District of a \"no cut\" policy for the new middle school sixth graders has been responsible for the tremendous escalation of numbers of young African-American athletes. Finally, the adherence of the District to the Supplemental Instruction Plan (\"SIP\") has had a positive effect on growth of student participants. The SIP program allows athletes to continue to participate in sports while they attend tutoring to improve their grades. Parent and Teacher Survey The 1999-2000 survey of parents and teachers reflects the District's success in the area of ' extracurricular activities. Ninety percent of African-American parents and 93 percent of white/other parents that expressed an opinion agreed that activities were open to students. Ninety-three percent of African-American teachers and 95 percent of white/other teachers that expressed an opinion agreed that students have opportunities for activities. Activities Advisory Board At the time of the District's Interim Compliance Report, a steering committee had been formed to organize an Activities Advisory Board (\"AAB\") for the purpose of promoting, supporting, and enhancing extracurricular and co-curricular activities at all schools. The AAB, comprised of District staff, parents, students, and community representatives, began monthly meetings in April of 2000. Specific areas related to activities have been targeted for discussion and implementation. The focus of these discussions has been on a disproportionate number of African-American students who do not have the financial resources to participate in activities. Other areas of discussion and implementation include marketing, facilities, funding, accessibility, procedural process, and 28 scheduling. Each area has been discussed in connection with increasing student participation. with emphasis on assuring African-American participation. Fine Arts Director The Board has approved the position of Fine Arts Director. One of the basic responsibili.Hes of the Fine Arts Director is to provide leadership in improving student participation and success in fine arts courses, perfonnances, and competitions. In addition, the Fine Arts Director will be responsible for ensuring equitable opportunities are available to qualified African-American students. Section 2.6.3 LRSD shall provide transportation to students otherwise eligible for transportation to school to allow those students to participate in after-school activities required for participation in an extracurricular activity. The District provides transportation to students otherwise eligible for transportation to allow those students to participate in after-school extracurricular activities. Through December 7, 2000, the District averaged 74.3 extracurricular activity runs per day, 29.1 for high schools and 45.2 for the middle schools. No records are kept of the students taking advantage of this service because the number and type of activities vary so greatly day to day. However, no extracurricular activity transportation request made by an eligible student has been denied. 29 VII. Advanced Placement Courses and the Gifted and Talented Program. Section 2.6.1 LRSD shall implement a training program during each of the next three years designed to assist teachers and counselors in identifying and encouraging African-American students to participate in honors and enriched courses and advanced placement courses. Section 2.6.2 LRSD shall implement programs to assist African-American students in being successful in honors and enriched courses and advanced placement courses. Policies The Board approved the revision of Policy IKF, General Education Graduation Requirements, in December 2000. This revision included enhancements of the recommended curriculum. Effective for the class of 2004, students taking the recommended Curriculum must complete a total of 28 units, including at least eight Pre-AP or AP courses. The University Studies courses offered at Hall High School may substitute, as well as any other approved dual-credit courses taken by District students. To receive an Honors Seal on their diploma, students must complete the recommended curriculum and earn a grade-point average of at least 3.5. Criteria for earning the new Arkansas Scholars Seal and a Magnet Program Seal were also included. These changes provide incentives and recognition for more students to take the most challenging courses. Procedures With the revision of Policy IKF, the Board also revised the related regulations. The new regulations include new career focus areas for Teachers of Tomorrow, Computer Technology, and International Studies at Central High School, as well as new programs in Career and Technical Education, such as the new Aviation Technology courses. New courses were also added to the list of courses that will satisfy the Technology Applications requirement. See Section 2.4 for a discussion of procedures for participation of students with disabiliti~s in AP courses. The 2001-02 Middle School Curriculum Catalog and the 2001-02 High School Curriculum Catalog included the following language in bold print: \"Schools are encouraged to allow open admission to all Pre-AP and AP courses and then to require attendance, good behavior, and acceptable performance (including effort, not just a minimum grade) to stay in the course, rather than to deny admission to any motivated student who wishes to try a more challenging curriculum.\" The curriculum catalogs also contained language making it clear that ESL students must have access to AP courses. All this information was presented to counselors, registrars, and principals during the January 2001 curriculum orientation workshops conducted by the Associate Superintendent for Instruction. She emphasized the importance of increasing the participation and performance of African-American students in advanced programs and in extracurricular activities. 30 The middle school and high school Student/Parent Guides to Course Selection for 2001-02 also included extensive information about Pre-AP and AP courses. as well as strong encouragement to students to take the courses. The District's Quality Index continues to include indicators that the District is achieving_!he goals of improved access and success in AP courses among all students, especially AfricanAmerican students. These indicators include the enrollment and completion rates in advanced courses, including Pre-AP and AP, as well as University Studies courses at Hall High School\nthe percent of seniors who graduate earning the Honors Seal\nthe percent of grade 8 students who have completed Algebra I\nand the percent of students scoring at a \"3\" or above on the Advanced Placement examinations. Data with regard to some of these indicators are presented below. Programs Gifted and Talented Program The Gifted and Talented (\"GT\") Program specialists and facilitators (teachers) are responsible for being resources in their respective schools to aid in the academic achievement of identified gifted students as well as aiding teachers in providing enrichment for all students. The teachers are, therefore, encouraged to participate in all professional activities that would help them to be more effective in their jobs. The teachers are provided opportunities for professional growth through various inservice sessions and conferences. GT facilitators representing each secondary school (middle and high) meet each month to share ideas, develop materials, receive new information regarding gifted programs, and learn new ideas to enhance their schools. Facilitators share curricular and co-curricular activities at their respective schools through a publication called \"Sharing the Good News.\" This publication is published six times per year. GT specialists provide a connection between the regular curriculum and the gifted curriculum\ntherefore, they must be well informed of both curricula. The professional development activities that they receive must connect to all of the curriculum departments because they are the advocates and resources in their schools for high achievement. They in turn become resources to the various departments because of their expertise. The table on the following page outlines the professional development growth opportunities for and by the GT Department. 31 Gifted and Talented Program Professional Development Date Title I Number Participating 1/30/98 Tn-District GT Specialists lnserv1ce (Pulaski Co, NLR and 66 LRSD) 3/19/98 Kingore Observauon Inventory Traimng (Designed to 32 observe gifted behaviors of students in grades K-2 whole group enrichment) 9/3/99 GT Student Achievement and Assessment (Rubrics and 16 Ponfolios) Cluster B 9/10/98 GT Student Achievement and Assessment (Rubrics and 17 Ponfolios) Cluster C 9/28/98 Office for Civil Rights Visit - Identification of Gifted 7 Students 10/15/98 AVID Awareness (Advancement Via Individual 24 Determination - Program designed to help underachieving and underrepresented students in advanced classes/programs)(lncluded principals, community persons, counselors and teachers) 10/9/98 GT Curriculum Writing Workshop 5 11/17/98 GT Student Achievement and Assessment - Cluster A 10 11 / 18/98 GT Student Achievement and Assessment - Cluster B 7 11 /19/98 GT Student Achievement and Assessment - Cluster C II 12/4/98 Testing Procedures and Research Development 35 515-5/7/99 Implementation of the Research Guide 35 6/2/99 Curriculum Development 32 6/3/99 Curriculum Development 32 6/4/99 Curriculum Development 33 9/29/99 Introduction to Windows 95 (Technology Course- This 3 course was provided according to the skills and needs of the specialists) I 0/1/99 Introduction to Word Processing (Technology Course) 8 10/5/99 Curriculum Mapping and Content Standards/Performance 10 Assessment- Cluster A 10/6199 Curriculum Mapping and Content Standards/Performance 11 Assessment- Cluster B 10/7/99 Curriculum Mapping and Content Standards/Performance 11 Assessment - Cluster C 10/8/99 Introduction to Word Processing (Technology Course) JO 10/ 14/99 Senior High Counselors- Recruiting and Preparing Students for a Rigorous Academic Curriculum 11 /9/11 Using E-Mail and the Internet (Technology Course) 12 32 Date Title - Number Participating 12/3/99 Curriculum Mappmg and Portfolios, ESL Students and 33 Refrigerator Curriculum 2/22/00 PowerPoint Productions 8 2/24/00 PowerPoint Productions 7 3/9/00 PowerPoint Productions 10 3/6/00 ESL Training/Curriculum Issues - Cluster A 11 3/21/00 ESL Training/Curriculum Issues - Cluster B 7 3/23/00 ESL Training/Curriculum Issues - Cluster C 13 3/16/00 PowerPoint Productions 12 4/6/00 Marco Polo Training (Technology Course) l* 4/7/00 Marco Polo Training (Technology Course) 2* 4/10/00 Effective Literacy Training 35 4/11/00 Marco Polo Training (Technology Course) 17 4/17/00 ELLA Training 33 4/18/00 Graphic Organizers in the Classroom (Technology Course) 11 4/20/00 Graphic Organizers in the Classroom (Technology Course) 10 4/25/00 ESL Students (LEP) in Gifted Programs and Pre-AP and AP 10 Programs (GT Facilitators) 4/27/00 Science Program - Hands On 32 5/30/00 Math Program - Hands On 32 9/11/00 Middle School Research - 6w Grade Teachers  24 9/11/00 Teaching Thinking Using CoRT and the Six Thinking Hats 19 9/12/00 Middle School Research- 7w Grade Teachers** 23 9/13/00 Middle School Research- 8w Grade Teachers 25 9/18/00 Teaching Thinking Using CoRT and the Six Thinking Hats 17 10/3 and Instructional Strategics of GIT Unit Design 31 10/5/00 10/27/00 ESL Strategies for GT Specialists (ESL Designated Schools) 6 11/10/00 ESL Strategics for GT Specialists 8 12/09/00 GT Instructional Strategies and Assessment 31  Teachers mcluded ma larger group  GT Staff Provided Instruction for Classroom Teachers New AP and Pre-AP Courses Two new AP courses, Human Geography and Economics, were added to the curriculum for 2000-2001. An additional two new AP courses, World History and Physics II, were added to the curriculum for 2001-2002. One new science Pre-AP course, Advanced Science/Theoretical Research II, was added to the curriculum for 2001-02. Proposed International Baccalaureate Programme at Cloverdale Middle School and McClellan High School The magnet school grant proposal submitted by the District to the U.S. Department of Education in December 2000 included the proposed implementation of the International Baccalaureate Programme at Cloverdale Middle School and McClellan High School. This plan includes the introduction of the International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme in grades 6-8, integrated with three other curricula themes: Economics, Multimedia, and Engineering. The planning team stated that they see this approach as necessary to ensure academic rigor at their 33 school. The Middle Years Programme will continue at McClel lan High School in grades 9-1 0. and then the International Baccalaureate Diploma program \\\\ill be implemented in grades 11 -12. At McClellan the International Baccalaureate courses will be integrated with that school 's themes -- Business and Finance, Multimedia and Graphic Design, and Engineering Design and Fabrication -- creating a continuity of curricula purpose throughout the high school and from its feeder middle school. If this grant is funded (notification is expected in April 2001), then the International Baccalaureate Programme courses will be another category of advanced and challenging courses available to students, and their enrollment will be tracked and analyzed, along with the AP, PreAP, and University Studies courses. Middle School Research and Writing Pre-AP The English department for secondary schools worked with teachers, librarians/media specialists, and gifted/talented teachers during summer 2000 to write a new curriculum guide for Research and Writing 6 Pre-AP, 7 Pre-AP, and 8 Pre-AP. Then teachers were trained in how to use the guide in fall 2000. This work grew out of the Middle School Curriculum Refinement Plan that was developed in summer 2000 and included an activity to create qualitatively differentiated courses at the Pre-AP level. High School Reading and Writing Workshop I Three high schools (Fair, Hall, and McClellan) opted to include the two-period English I Workshop and English I Workshop Pre-AP in their master schedules for 2000-01. As of January 2001, all three of those schools plan to continue the program in 2001-02, plus Parkview High School and, perhaps, Central High School. Additionally, effective fall 2001, the Fair, Hall and McClellan have plans to implement the two-period English II Workshop and English II Workshop Pre-AP. This program incorporates some of the characteristics of the Project A YID support class for students so that they can be more successful in their advanced courses. The course was also created to improve student performance on the End-of-Level Literacy test. that all students must take in grade 11 as a part of the State Benchmark examinations, as well as performance on the SAT/ACT necessary for college admission. Teacher and Counselor Training The District has committed to providing teachers with the appropriate training to ensure that all students are successful in upper-level courses. Teachers are involved in the training offered through the College Board. The District has provided the funds to participate though a reimbursement program provided by the State. During summer 2000, 28 teachers participated in Advanced Placement Summer Institutes in Hot Springs and Fayetteville. The subject areas were science, mathematics, social studies, art, and foreign language. During fall 2000, 53 teachers in English, social studies and foreign language attended an AP workshop. The number of teachers attending is lower this fall because Pre-AP training in social studies was not available. 34 Forty-four teachers participated in the Gifted Programs Secondary Content Workshop on August 4, 2000. This training is designed to help teachers work more effectively with identified students in their classes. All counselors and registrars participated in training on January 9-11, 2001, during the ammal curriculum orientations conducted by the Division oflnstruction on the importance of student access to and success in Pre-AP and AP courses. Results of Policies/Procedures/Programs Implementation Identified GT Students The following table displays the number of identified GT students at the elementary school level for school years 1998-99, 1999-2000, and 2000-01 ( as of January 2001 ). There was a significant reduction in elementary school numbers in 1999-2000 when grade 6 students moved from the elementary schools to the middle schools. Then there was an increase of 131 students identified and served from 1999-2000 to 2000-01. Eighty-nine of those were African-American (or 68 percent of the increase). The percentage of African-American students in the elementary program has remained steady at 45 percent. White student participation has declined slightly over three years from 50 percent to 48 percent, with \"other\" students improving from 5 percent to 7 percent. The total number of identified students at the elementary level in 2000-01 was 1516. A-A White Other Total Little Rock School District Gifted Program Elementary Participants 1998-99 Percent 1999-2000 Percent 2000-2001 883 45% 599 43% 688 986 50% 708 51% 723 106 5% 78 6% 105 1975 1385 1516 Percent 45% 48% 7% Secondary students include those in middle schools (grades 6-8) and in high schools (grades 9- 12). At the secondary level GT students are served primarily through the Pre-AP and AP courses. The only school that serves GT students in courses separate from Pre-AP and AP courses is Dunbar Magnet Middle Schoolj which is a GT magnet. GT courses are offered at Dunbar in all three grade levels and in all the core subject areas. In addition, a GT Seminar course is available to students at all three grade levels. The following table displays secondary student enrollment over three school years: 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-01. Although the numbers of African-American students participating in the gifted/talented program have increased from 1224 to 1333 (an increase of 109), the percentage of the total enrollment has declined slightly from 50 percent to 48 percent. White student enrollment went up only one percentage point over the three-year period, as did \"other\" student enrollment. The total number of identified students at the secondary level in 2000-01 was 2758. 35 1998-99 A-A 1224 Whne 1136 Other 93 Total 2453 Little Rock School District Gifted Program Secondary Participants Percent 1999-2000 Percent 2000-2001 50% 1468 49% 1333 46% 1404 47% 1298 4% 124 4% 127 2996 2758 Advanced Placement Courses Percent 48% 47% 5% Great effort has been expended in improving student, especially African-American student, access to AP courses. In summary, the following strategies were implemented:  Improved recruitment of students by teachers and counselors for AP course enrollment\n Added several new AP courses to the curriculum in 1999-2000 and again in 2000- 01\n Authorized all AP courses to be available in all five high schools\n Included enrollment in AP courses as one of the Quality Index indicators\n Changed regulations so that students may now enroll in a Pre-AP or AP course if they earned at least a \"C\" in the previous course\n Increased awareness of goals through the Revised Plan, the National Science Foundation Project, policies and regulations adoption, and professional development for teachers, counselors, and principals\n Published in the curriculum catalogs the guidelines for ensuring access of students to the AP and Pre-AP courses, including those with disabilities, those identified as \"504,\" ESL students, and those who are non-traditional students\n Ensured equal access to the professional development courses for teachers oy advancing the funds so that teachers could participate in the AP and Pre-AP conferences and Institute, thereby ensuring more equity for students at all schools\n Conducted parent night meetings at secondary schools to provide infonnation to parents about AP and Pre-AP programs, the importance of enrollment in courses, and the need for parental support in keeping students in courses\nand  Increased communication with parents through direct conferences and through the High School Student/Parent Guide to Course Selection and Graduation Requirements. 36 Enrollment in AP Courses The table on the following page displays enrollment in each of the AP courses offered by the College Board for African-American students as compared to .. other\" students for school years 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000, and 2000-01. Important findings are as follows: Improvements in Total Enrollments in AP Courses  The total enrollment of African-American students in AP courses increased from 4 71 in 1997-98 to 797 in 2000-0 I-an increase of 326 students or 69 percent.  The total enrollment of \"other\" students in AP courses increased from 964 in 1997-98 to 1495 in 2000-01-an increase of 53 I students or 55 percent.  The total enrollment of all students in AP courses increased from 1435 in 1997-98 to 2292 in 2000-01-an increase of 857 students or 60 percent. Changes in Enrollments in Specific AP Courses  In 1997-98 the District had students enrolled in 16 AP courses. The number of courses taught in 1998-99 increased to 18, in 1999-2000 to 20, and remained at 20 in 2000-01. According to the College Board's 1998 Advanced Placement Yearbook, \"the average participating high school offers six AP courses.\" A greater variety of courses in the District contributed to the attraction of more diverse students to the program. (Note: Spanish IV-VI was counted as one course, as were the multiple levels of French, German, and Latin, so the total number of courses may be higher than the numbers provided.)  The most popular AP course in 1997-98 was American History, with 284 students enrolled, followed closely by English IV with 277 students. These two AP courses substituted for graduation requirements, which, no doubt, contributed to the high enrollment. A similar pattern in course taking occurred in 1998-99, with 287 students enrolled in English IV and 260 in American History. With the addition of AP English ill in fall 1999, the enrollment shifted somewhat: 320 students enrolled in American History, 246 in English IV, and 186 in English III. English IV was the most popular course in 2000-01, with 359 students enrolled. American History had 299 students, and English III had 261.  Over the three-year period the biggest enrollment increases among AfricanAmerican students were in American History-an increase of 60 students\nEnvironmental Science-an increase of 57 students\nEnglish IV--an increase of 49 students\nand Statistics-an increase of 42 students. Also, 75 African-American students were enrolled in AP English ill in 2000-01 (that course was not offered in 1997-98).  The biggest improvements over the three-year period in AP enrollment were in English III (increase of 261), Environmental Science (increase of 174), in English IV (increase of 82)\nPsychology (increase of 63)\nin Art History (increase of 58)\nand Statistics (increase of 53). Some of the improvement in English III AP comes from a reduced number of students taking English ill Pre-AP\nand some of the improvement in Statistics AP is the result of fewer students taking Algebra II PreAP. 37 Enrollment in Advanced Placement Courses APCoune 1997-98 19~8-99 1999-2000 2 Yr. Change 2000--01 3 Yr. Change A-A Other Total A-A Other Total A-A Other Total A-A Other Total A-A Other Total A-A Other Total English Ill 0 0 0 22 13 3S 70 116 186 +70 +116 186 7S 186 261 +7S +186 261 English IV 93 184 277 98 189 287 I0S 141 246 +12 -43 -31 142 217 3S9 +49 +33 82 Caltulus AB 55 96 ISi 53 79 132 50 66 116 -5 -30 -35 58 122 180 +3 +26 29 Caltulus BC 2 IS 17 4 10 14 0 8 8 -2 -7 -9 0 10 10 -2 -5 -7 Slalislits 8 46 54 10 40 50 36 36 72 +28 -10 18 so S7 107 +42 +II 53 Biology JI 42 52 94 31 59 90 58 66 124 +16 +14 30 42 116 128 0 +34 34 Chemistry II s 27 32 13 43 56 20 42 62 +IS +15 30 2S 311 63 +20 +II 31 Physits II 2 25 27 0 14 14 8 25 33 +6 0 6 3 30 33 +I +5 6 Env. Stitncr 2 s 7 16 42 58 41 42 83 +39 +37 76 59 122 181 +57 +117 174 Eur. History 88 114 202 90 90 180 so 79 129 -38 -35 -73 54 90 144 -34 -24 -SIi Amtr. llislory 107 177 284 115 145 260 127 193 320 +20 +16 36 167 132 299 +60 -45 15 Psythology 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 26 36 +10 +26 36 18 4S 63 +18 +45 63 Gov. \u0026amp; Polilits 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 7 +4 +3 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 Etonomits 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Human Geog. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s 9 14 +5 +9 14 Frtnth IV-VI 12 56 68 10 24 34 18 31 49 +6 -25 -19 16 56 72 +4 0 4 Gtrman IV-VI I 27 28 0 15 IS 0 16 16 -I -II -12 0 17 17 -I -10 -11 Spanish IV-VI 32 96 128 27 57 84 so 74 124 +18 -22 -4 38 128 166 +6 +32 311 Lalin 111-V I 3 4 0 2 2 0 2 2 -1 -I -2 2 32 34 +I +29 30 Art llislory 0 0 0 29 70 99 18 67 85 +18 +67 85 6 52 58 +6 +52 58 Studio Art 9 16 25 14 21 3S 12 30 42 +3 +14 17 18 37 ss +9 +21 ~o Mus. Theory 12 2S 37 9 23 32 18 33 51 +6 +8 14 19 29 48 +7 +4 ~ Comp. Stitnte 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 471 964 1435 541 936 1477 695 1096 1791 +224 +132 356 797 1495 2292 +326 +531 857 Ptrttnt or Total 33 67 100 37 63 100 39 61 .,,. 100% 35% 65% 100%  I Yr.lncreast IS -3 3% 28 17% 21% IS 36% 28%  2 Yr.lntrtan 48 14 25% 47% 60% 55%  3 Yr. Increase 69% 5S - 60% The ltst of co11rses above mc/11des all AP courses ava,lable through Jhe College Board.  The greatest decline in enrollment over the three-year period has been in AP European History. Enrollment has declined 58 students-from 202 to 144. The major reason for this decline is that under the former graduation policy, students could substitute this course for the requirement of World History. Effectiye fall 1998, the State Board of Education changed their rules and stated that European History could no longer substitute for World History-thus reducing student interest in the course, especially among African-American students who accounted for 34 of the 58-student decline.  The District also experienced a drop in German IV-V-VI enrollment over the three-year period-from 28 students in 1997-98 to only 17 in 2000-01, a decrease of 11 students. Ten of the I I-student decrease in enrollment were \"other\" students. The District sees increased student interest in Spanish and the difficulty of staffing German classes as contributing to the change in this area. Pre-Advanced Placement Courses In December 1998 the Board approved a major revision of the high school curriculum. Among the changes were the elimination of all former courses labeled \"honors,\" \"advanced,\" or \"enriched.\" The District made a decision to label all such courses as Pre-AP so that the alignment behind the AP courses was more evident for everyone and for greater consistency and ease of communication. Another change was the establishment of Pre-AP courses in the core subject areas, beginning in grade 6, with the transition to middle school. Data were collected in 1999-2000 and again in 2000-01 on the enrollment in the Pre-AP program since this is the pipeline through which the District plans to develop the talent already in the District. Through these courses teachers can build the students' capacity to perform at higher and higher levels and, thus, to succeed in the AP courses in grades 11 and 12. Improvements in Enrollments in High School Pre-AP Courses The table on the following page displays enrollment in all Pre-AP courses at the high school level for both school years of implementation, 1999-2000 and 2000-01. 39 Enrollment in High School Pre-AP Courses Course 1999-2000 2000-2001 One-Year Change A-A Other Total A-A Other Total A-A Other English I 267 293 560 340 346 686 73 53 English II 253 284 537 298 316 614 45 32 English III 149 187 336 208 155 363 59 -32 Algebra II 169 330 499 168 257 425 -1 -73 Geometry 152 184 336 200 291 491 48 107 Trig/Adv. 92 168 260 79 222 301 -13 54 Biology I 280 277 557 289 332 621 9 55 Chemistry I 189 234 423 247 269 516 58 35 Physics I 171 191 362 177 274 451 6 83 Sci. Rsrch. 10 10 20 2 14 16 -8 4 Civics 283 282 565 333 347 680 50 65 World Hist. 326 284 610 374 415 789 48 131 World Geog. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 2341 2724 5065 2715 3238 5953 374 514 Percents 46% 54% 100% 46% 54% 100% 1-Yr. Growth 16% 15% 15% Key findings are as follows:  The total number of high school students who enrolled in Pre-AP courses improved in 2000-2001 from 5065 to 5953-an increase of 888 students or a 15 percent improvement.  African-American student enrollment improved at a slightly higher rate-from 2341 in 1999-2000 to 2715 in 2000-01, an increase of 374 students or 16 percent. \"Other\" student enrollment also improved-from 2724 in 1999-2000 to 3238 in 2000-01 for an increase of 514 students or 15 percent.  The percentage of African-American students in the total high school Pre-AP enrollment remained the same- 46 percent in 1999-2000 and in 2000-2001.  The most popular high school Pre-AP course in 1999-2000 was World History . Pre-AP with 610 students enrolled and the only course with more than 600 students. In 2000-01 five courses surpassed 600, but World History remained the favorite: English II Pre-AP with 614, Biology I Pre-AP with 621, Civics Pre-AP with 680, English I Pre-AP with 686, and World History Pre-AP with 789.  African-American student enrollment improved in English III Pre-AP by 59 students\n\"other\" student enrollment, however, declined by 32. Seventy AfricanAmerican students chose English III AP at this level, rather than the Pre-AP option, and 116 \"other\" students made this decision, which most likely accounts for the decline in \"other\" enrollment in the Pre-AP course.  African-American enrollment in Pre-AP Algebra II declined by one student, and \"other\" student enrollment declined by 73. A partial explanation for this situation is that Statistics AP, which is an alternative course to Algebra II Pre-AP, increased by 22 students in 2000-01.  The largest one-year improvement in enrollment was in World History Pre-AP with 179. Close behind were Geometry with a 155 improvement, English I with 40 Total 126 77 27 -74 155 41 64 93 89 -4 115 179 0 888 126, and Civics with 115. The largest grm~'th for African-American students was in English I Pre-AP (73), and the largest gtowth for \"other\" students was in \\\\'orld History Pre-AP ( 131).  Freshman and sophomore-level course enrollments were generally much higher than those at the junior level. Just as in middle school, it is important to keep these students in the pipeline toward talcing the AP courses. If the District is successful in doing so, AP English enrollment, as an example, could potentially increase a great deal in just two years. Improvements in Enrollments in Middle School Pre-AP Courses The table on the following page displays enrollment in all Pre-AP courses at the middle school level for both years of implementation, 1999-2000 and 2000-0 I. Key findings are as follows:  Even though some feared that students were over-enrolled in the Pre-AP courses at the middle school level in 1999-2000, even more students stepped up to the challenge in 2000-01. The African-American student enrollment grew 937 in one year for an improvement of 19 percent\n\"other\" students grew by 1076 for an improvement of 24 percent. The District as a whole grew by 2013 students or 22 percent.  In contrast to enrollment in the high school AP courses, where African-American enrollment was 35 percent of the total in 2000-01, the African-American enrollment in middle school Pre-AP courses was 51 percent of the total.  If students currently in the middle school pipeline continue through high school in the Pre-AP courses and then take AP courses in grades 11-12, the District can project significant improvements in the AP course enrollments as the current middle school students move into grade 11. As an example, there are currently 828 students enrolled in English 6 Pre-AP and 80 additional students enrolled in English 6 GT for a total of 908 students taking an advanced English course in grade 6 during 2000-01. At the high school level there are only 261 students talcing AP English III in 2000-01. If AP English III enrollment increased to 908, the District would have almost a 250 percent improvement. Enrollment in Specific Middle School Pre-AP Courses   The most popular Pre-AP courses at any grade level in middle schools are the English courses. For example, 908 grade 6 students are enrolled in a Pre-AP or GT English course. Enrollment in other core areas is less: 742 in Pre-AP/GT mathematics\n792 in Pre-AP/GT science\nand 754 in Pre-AP/GT social studies. Algebra I enrollment in middle school made a big jump in 2000-01-from 300 students in 1999-2000 to 426 in 2000-01, a 42 percent increase. In addition, four students were enrolled in 2000-01 in Algebra II and another 19 in Geometry for a total of 449 students enrolled in high school mathematics courses in 2000-01 , as compared to 308 in 1999-2000. That is an increase of 46 percent in one year. 41 - - II - \n1 I I I 111 I Enrollment in Middle School Pre-AP Courses I Course 1999-2000 2000-2001 One-Year Change 1~ 1 A-A Other Total A-A Other Total A-A Other Total i- Read/Write 6 Pre-AP 370 299 669 438 390 828 68 91 159 Read/Write 7 Pre-AP 391 305 696 411 318 729 20 13 33 Read/Write 8 Pre-AP 321 241 562 365 322 687 44 81 125 Read/Write 6 GT 14 37 51 21 59 80 7 22 29 Read/Wnte 7 GT 17 58 75 14 48 62 -3 -10 -13 I-Read/ Write 8 GT 18 41 59 15 59 74 -3 18 15 Rsrch/Write 6 Pre-AP 187 152 339 302 208 510 115 56 171 Rsrch/Write 7 Pre-AP 156 107 263 309 196 505 153 89 242  Rsrch/Write 8 Pre-AP 118 65 183 243 132 375 125 67 192 Rsrch/Write 6 GT 2 14 16 21 59 80 19 45 64 Rsrch/Write 7 GT 7 22 29 14 48 62 7 26 33  Rsrch/Write 8 GT 4 6 10 15 59 74 11 53 64 Mathematics 6 Pre-AP 313 266 579 363 314 677 50 48 98 Mathematics 7 Pre-AP 287 322 609 345 290 635 58 -32 26 - '\\ Mathematics 8 Pre-AP 261 142 403 233 104 337 -28 -38 -66 Algebra I Pre-AP 124 176 300 130 296 426 6 120 126 Algebra II Pre-AP 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 4 4 Geometry Pre-AP 0 8 8 I 18 19 I 10 11 II Mathematics 6 GT 13 32 45 12 53 65 -1 21 20 Mathematics 7 GT 9 28 37 9 28 37 Science 6 Pre-AP 330 291 621 381 339 720 51 48 99 II I! Science 7 Pre-AP 365 320 685 399 339 738 34 19 53 Science 8 Pre-AP 299 256 555 379 341 720 80 85 165 Science 6 GT 19 39 58 19 53 72 0 14 14 I 11 Science 7 GT 15 54 69 16 48 64 1 -6 -5 Science 8 GT 15 43 58 14 61 75 -1 18 17 Health Sci. 6 Pre-AP 31 17 48 30 24 54 -1 7 6 Health Sci. 7 Pre-AP 18 30 48 32 22 54 14 -8 6 - Health Sci. 8 Pre-AP 12 17 29 18 30 48 6 13 19 Lab Science 6 Pre-AP 22 28 50 25 37 62 3 9 12 Lab Science 7 Pre-AP 23 32 55 27 31 58 4 -1 3 II Lab Science 8 Pre-AP 24 26 50 28 39 67 4 13 17 Soc. Studies 6 Pre-AP 337 291 628 359 323 682 22 32 54 Soc. Studies 7 Pre-AP 344 303 647 374 324 698 30 21 51 Soc. Studies 8 Pre-AP 322 241 563 347 316 663 25 75 100 I Soc. Studies 6 GT 11 36 47 19 53 72 8 17 25 Soc. Studies 7 GT 16 56 72 16 45 61 0 -11 -11 Soc. Studies 8 GT 14 44 58 13 63 76 -1 19 18 II Totals 4820 4417 9237 5757 5493 11,250 937 1076 2013 Percents 52% 48% 100% 51% 49% 100% One-Year Change 19% 24% 22% I 11 I\\ I II 42  -  Enrollment in Pre-AP courses predictably declines at each grade level as students drop out of the program. Interestingly, ho\\vever, in 1999-2000 there were 720 students enrolled in grade 6 Pre-AP/GT English. In 2000-01 those students enrolled in Pre-AP/GT English 7 in even greater numbers: 791-an increase of 71 students in one grade level and a trend that runs counter to what usually h_appens.  There were large increases of enrollment in 2000-01 in the Research and Writing Pre-AP/GT course -- 171 in grade 6,242 in grade 7, and 192 in grade 8. This change reflects a change in the schools' policy. In 1999-2000 Pre-AP/GT students were enrolled in only one period of the Reading/Writing Workshop, and they were free to choose the second period as an elective-Research and Writing. Given the importance of this course, most schools decided to register all PreAP/ GT students into both periods in 2000-01. AP Examination The District's major emphasis in 1999-2000 and 2000-01 has been on encouraging enrollment in the advanced courses so that increasing numbers of students experience a more rigorous curriculum and begin to see themselves as college-bound. College Board research shows that students talcing an AP course and earning even a \"2\" on the test (\"3\" is the minimum score required to earn college credit) do better in college courses than those who did not talce the course. Although the District's priority during 1999-2000 and 2000-01 was not in increasing the number of students talcing AP examinations or in improving the percent who earned college credit on the examinations (but rather on improvements in enrollment), some notable improvements did occur in the number of examinations talcen. AP Examination Participation 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 Change Number of candidates 249 298 251 1% Number of exams 427 508 489 15% The District also recognized that when the numbers of students talcing any test increase, average scores generally decline since the test was formerly reserved for a more select group of students. The trade-off is worthwhile, since in the long run greater participation in the AP program will reap more benefits for greater numbers of students than simply meeting the goal of raising the average scores of a small group. The following table displays the percentage of District students earning a score of \"3\" or above on AP examinations over the past three years, 1997-98, 1998-99, and 1999-2000. The District anticipates that the percentage of students earning college credit will continue to be stagnant until the increased numbers of students talcing the AP examinations are those who have been in the Pre-AP courses for several years. Many of the new students currently talcing the tests are in their first advanced course and have simply not had enough years of preparation to do well. For now, the celebration is that more students took the examination in 1998-99 and 1999-2000 than in the baseline year, 1997-98, and more students are earning a \"3\" or more on the examinations than in 43 the baseline year. Fifty-five percent of 489 (or 268) is, therefore, better than 59 percent of 427 (or252). Number and Percent of Students Earning a '3\" or More on AP Examinations 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 252 (59%) 273 (54%) 268 (55%) Grades in Advanced Placement Courses The table on the following page displays the percentage of students, by race, earning a grade of \"C\" or above in AP courses in 1999-2000, spring semester. Data for earlier years could not be retrieved for comparison purposes due to changes in the course numbers and titles that occurred in fall 1999. Final grades for 2000-01 will not be available until June 2001. Percentage of Students Earning a \"C\" or Above in AP, 1999-2000 Spring Semester AP Course A-A White Other Total English III 87 96 95 93 English IV 82 93 93 89 Calculus AB 77 87 100 85 Calculus BC -- 88 100 89 Statistics 89 83 92 87 Biology II 80 97 86 89 Chemistry II 85 90 100 91 Physics II 88 95 91 92 Env. Science 91 90 100 90 Eur. History 86 88 90 88 Amer. History 72 88 81 81 Psychology 80 96 100 92 Gov. \u0026amp; Politics -- -- -- -- Economics -- - -- -- Human Geog. -- -- -- -- French IV 73 85 100 81 French V 75 100 -- 91 French VI -- 100 -- 100 German IV -- 100 -- 100 German V -- 100 -- 100 German VI -- 100 -- 100 Spanish IV 75 96 92 88 Spanish V 100 86 86 91 Spamsh VI 89 92 100 92 Laun III 100 96 100 97 Latin IV -- -- -- -- Latin V -- -- -- -- Art History 83 90 89 89 Studio Art 91 82 100 86 Mus. Theory 100 97 100 98 Comp. Science -- -- -- -- -- denotes no enrollment m course m spnng 2000. 44 Grades in High School Pre-AP Courses, Spring 1999-2000 The following table provides information relating to the p-ercentage of students, by race, who earned a \"C\" or above in Pre-AP courses at the high school level in spring 2000. Percentage of Students Earning a \"C\" or Above in High School Pre-AP Courses, 1999-2000 Spring Semester Pre-AP Course A-A White Other Total English I 74 90 97 83 English II 64 81 91 74 English III 74 77 90 76 Algebra II 77 89 96 85 Geometry 68 87 89 79 Trig/Adv. 78 90 93 86 Biology I 73 85 79 79 Chemistry I 67 81 87 76 Physics I 71 84 93 80 Sci. Research 70 100 - 85 Civics 90 94 93 92 World History 81 88 87 85 Grades in Middle School Pre-AP Courses, Spring 1999-2000 The following table displays the percent of students, by race, who earned a \"C\" or above in middle school Pre-AP courses in spring, 1999-2000. Percentage of Students Earning a \"C\" or Above in Middle School Pre-AP Courses, 1999-2000 Spring Semester Pre-AP Course A-A White Other Total Read/Write 6 Pre-AP 92 96 100 94 Read/Write 7 Pre-AP 80 89 92 85 Read/Write 8 Pre-AP 83 91 94 87 Read/Write 6 GT 100 100 100 100 Read/Write 7 GT 88 98 88 95 Read/Write 8 GT 39 78 100 70 Rsrch/Write 6 Pre-AP 93 95 100 94 Rsrch/Write 7 Pre-AP 89 97 100 92 Rsrch/Write 8 Pre-AP 82 92 100 87 Rsrch/Write 6 GT 100 100 100 100 Rsrch/Write 7 GT 100 100 100 100 Rsrch/Write 8 GT 75 83 100 83 Mathematics 6 Pre-AP 88 95 100 92 Mathematics 7 Pre-AP 74 90 86 83 Mathematics 8 Pre-AP 67 75 69 70 Algebra I Pre-AP 76 85 81 81 Algebra II Pre-AP - -- 100 100 Geometry Pre-AP .. 100 100 100 Mathematics 6 GT 100 94 100 96 Science 6 Pre-AP 96 99 100 97 Science 7 Pre-AP 79 91 89 85 Science 8 Pre-AP 91 91 94 91 45 Science 6 GT 95 100 100 : 98 I Science 7 GT 80 100 - 89 95 I Science 8 GT 67 82 I 100 I Sl Health Sci. 6 Pre-AP 84 77 S.3 s::: I Health Sci. 7 Pre-AP 63 46 100 57 Health Sci. 8 Pre-AP 92 88 88 89 ' Lab Science 6 Pre-AP 95 100 100 98 Lab Science 7 Pre-AP 83 90 100 88 Lab Science 8 Pre-AP 78 85 86 82 Soc. Studies 6 Pre-AP 89 96 96 92 Soc. Studies 7 Pre-AP 87 94 100 91 Soc. Studies 8 Pre-AP 87 92 94 89 Soc. Studies 6 GT 100 100 100 100 Soc. Studies 7 GT 94 100 100 99 Soc. Studies 8 GT 79 90 100 89 -- denotes no enrollment m course dunng spnng 2000. Enrollment in University Studies Courses at Hall High School Another category of advanced-level courses is the University Studies program at Hall High School, made available through a collaboration with UALR. The program began in 1999-2000 and continued in 2000-01. The following table displays the enrollment of students by race in these courses, where students earn concurrently both high school and university credit. Each course listed is a one-semester course, earning the student one-half high school credit and three semester hours of university credit. Course A-A Composition I 23 Composition II 19 Communications 6 Biology 8 Inrroduction to 14 Sociology Introduction to 9 Psychology Physics I Physics II College Algebra U.S. History I U. S. History II Totals 79 Percents 58% Enrollment in Universitv Studies Courses Hall High School, 1999-2000, 2000-01 1999-2000 2000-01 Other Total A-A Other 16 39 7 9 13 32 7 7 7 13 2 3 5 13 2 9 10 24 8 12 6 15 9 10 4 7 2 6 4 6 6 18 6 18 57 136 57 105 42% 100% 35% 65% Key observations are as follows: Total 16 14 5 11 20 19 11 8 10 24 24 162 100%  Enrollment in University Studies courses increased 26 students in 2000-01 over the initial year enrollment in 1999-2000 (from 136 to 162), representing an increase of 19 percent. 46  African-American student enrollment declined in 2000-01 from 79 the first year to 57-a decrease of22 students. \"Other\"srudent enrollment increased from 57 to 105 for an increase of 48. Numbers of Students Earning a \"C\" or Above in University Studies The following table shows the number and percent of students earning a grade of \"C\" or above in the University Studies courses at Hall High School. ACT Results Students Earning a Grade of \"C\" or Above University Studies, Hall High School, 1999-2000, 2000-01 Course 1999-2000 A-A Other Total Composition I 22/23 12/ 16 34/39 96% 75% 87% Composition II 16/19 12/13 28/32 84% 92% 88% Communications 5/6 7/7 12/13 83% 100% 92% Biology 6/8 4/5 10/13 75% 80% 77% Introduction to 10/14 519 15/23 Sociology 71% 56% 65% Introduction to 6/9 4/6 10/15 Psychology 67% 67% 67% Totals 65/79 44/56 109/122 82% 79% 89% The District has two quality indicators in its accountability system that relate to performance on the ACT, the college admission examination that most District students take. The first goal is to improve the numbers of students who take the ACT, and the second goal is to improve the performance of students on the ACT. Just as with the Advanced Placement examinations, the emphasis during the first few years is on encouraging students to take the test, to see themselves as college-bound, and to use the results for post-secondary planning. At the same time, a number of initiatives has been undertaken to improve student performance. They include:  Enhancing graduation requirements so that all students take the courses that are recommended in ACT preparation materials\n Including at least eight advanced courses to the recommended curriculum so that students are encouraged to take the most rigorous curriculum possible\n Revising ACT preparation courses for both English and mathematics and offering these courses in all five high schools\n Providing comprehensive Pre-AP and AP courses for students who see themselves going to college\n Aligning the Pre-AP curriculum, not only with the AP course requirements, but also with the ACT expectations\n47  Providing a series of pre-test workshops in each of the subject areas through the Community Education Department\nand. -  Better communicating with students and parents about ACT test dates, advantages of taking the test, financial aid, how to make scholarship applications, and how to apply to college. The following table includes the ACT results for school years 1997-98 through 1999-2000, disaggregated by race. The results are provided for each sub-test, as well as the composite (average) score. Students are required to earn a composite score ofat least a \"19\" to qualify for an Arkansas Challenge Scholarship. Year Total 1997-98 ' No:_ofTest\"s ~~-91 ~ ,-..:~~ akers.,,_'!i~ -~ - English Math Reading Sci. Reasoning Composite 1998-99 l\n\\~~2,.,.0~st~ ,.,. 929  .\n~alcers~ ~ English Math Reading Sci. Reasoning Composite 1999-00 ~ 9\n-ofJpt?f. e~- ,,_:_'Takers.~ ~ --- ~ English Math Reading Sci. Reasoning Composite ACT Results by Race and Gender 1997-98, 1998-99, and 1999-2000 Male Female A-A All White Mex./ Alsk. Chicano Ntv.\nJ:-,  ,1 .5,.\" '_ \"'=4.1ll\n-,,410~ -,,. -. 6- ---~-. -?268irj il~~JJ:~ ~ , ~ -a!:\",g~ : - ~ - .! it. -~ ~~'l-R )~i,..--.W. '- ,~. ~~~- 18.8 19.9 17.2 25.2 22.5 17 19.2 18 16.5 23 20.7 16.5 19.5 20.4 17.4 26.2 23.4 18.3 19.8 18.9 17.2 23.2 21.8 17.3 19.4 19.4 17.2 24.7 22.2 17.5 ~ ~5fb\"\"' ,~_ 55~4 \n\u0026gt;480 '.t? ,  .r1, ,. ' ' 3414 1\n'\n\".t: _~6\n\"l ~ ~ ' ,,_ ~ ~ :.\u0026lt;, - ~ .. ,\nl~ ~ t ... ~. ~ - ~~.: :?i! '_\n,..\",\"~'~ ~ -''. ''ii.-_ C .. ~- ., 19 20.3 17.1 20 23.2 16 18.6 18.3 16.5 20 20.6 15.5 19.6 20.2 17.2 24 23 .6 14.8 19.3 19.4 17.3 26 22 17 19.2 19.7 17.2 23 22.5 16.2 ~ .4.1'1.~- ~,.609,~ - ,, 111,,., 3 ... l,\nl t'.:-3~5t' rf6'1\u0026lt;,.~l? m~ ~~ -~1~$,.f~ \u0026amp;'ttil ~it ~ !) .. ~ :-..-, . .. ~~ 18.2 20 17.4 12.3 22.2 18.3 18.l 17.6 16.4 13.7 19.6 16.8 18.6 19.9 17.4 14 22.2 21.5 19.l 19 17.4 15.7 21.4 17.7 18.6 19.2 17.3 14 21.5 18.7 Asian/ P.R./ Mean PL Hispanic ~ 24,\n.\n,-~.:. s irs ' :~- ~~ -~:~~-1~~~tl ~. ~~ ~ .. ~- e ,,, .. l( 23.4 24.3 19.4 24.4 21.6 18.3 24.2 24.8 20.3 23 .6 21.1 19.5 24 23 19.5\n.i:.19~\n~ {,.\n~ ~:-ti... * ~\n,\n,.,..'lj ~-:f~::.8 .\ni: )~].,: cl'\"'.}, ~'\\IF,~~\n,.., .. - ~. 20.1 24.3 19.8 21.8 21.6 18.4 20.2 24.8 19.9 20.7 21.1 19.3 20.8 23 19.5 ., 20 \" ' ~:If ' 6 \\#1, 1 ..\n.~f~ ~j}\n. ff::i~ft ~.i'-'i~ l1,i1, . ,1::\"\n.'.,,c,\n~ .\n-'if.. . \u0026amp;i 21.6 16 19.3 23 .3 16.3 17.8 21.3 18.8 19.3 21.8 19.2 19 22.1 17.7 19 Key observations are as follows:  The number oftest-takers improved from 786 in 1997-98 to 1026 in 1999-2000 for an increase of 240 or a 31 percent improvement. The number of AfricanAmerican test-takers improved from 410 to 570--an increase of 160 students or a 39 percent improvement. The number of white test-takers also increased-from 268 in 1997-98 to 345 in 1999-2000--an improvement of77 students or a 29 percent improvement. 48  Only 40 percent of the test-takers in 1997-98 were male. This percentage remained at 40 percent in 1998-99 and went up slightly to 41 percent in 1999- 2000. These figures suggest the need for initiatives to increase the percentage of male test-takers.  African-American students improved their English scores from 17.2 in 1997-98 to 17.4 in 1999-2000. White students' scores declined from 22.5 to 22.2 in the same period. The District's average scores in English went down from 19 .4 to 19 .3.  African-American students' mathematics scores over the three years declined from 16.5 to 16.4, and white students' scores went down from 20.7 to 19.6. The average for the District went down from 18.3 to 17.8 between 1997-98 and 1999- 2000.  Reading scores for African-American students stayed at 17.4 from 1997-98 to 1999-2000, even though many more students were taking the test in 1999-2000. White students' scores went down from 23.4 to 22.2, and the District average declined in reading from 20.3 to 19.3.  African-American students improved their Science Reasoning scores from 17.2 in 1997-98 to 17.4 in 1999-2000-again with many more students taking the test. During the same period white students' scores declined from 21.8 to 21.4. The District's average score declined from 19.5 to 19.  African-American students improved their average composite score from 17.2 in 1997-98 to 17 .3 in 1999-2000, again with many more students taking the test. During the same period, white students' composite scores declined from 22.2 to 21.5. The District average declined from 19.5 to 19. That African-American participation in taking the ACT has improved so dramatically over three years (39 percent) while at the same time achievement has generally gone up is evidence that the initiatives to enroll these students in advanced courses are paying off already. It is very difficult for any group to increase its numbers and at the same time to improve their average scores. Parent Survey African-American students' willingness to move into more rigorous academic courses may reflect their belief that they will get the support they need to succeed. In the 1999-2000 parent survey, 88 percent of African-American parents who expressed on opinion agreed that their child received academic support. Eighty-six percent of white/other parents who expressed an opinion agreed with this statement. Summary and Next Steps Continued improvements are necessary for full equity of access to Pre-AP, AP, and other advanced courses, but the District is clearly on the right track in making these improvements, with large percentages of African-American students now taking advantage of the opportunity to participate. District and school-level staff members will continue to seek additional funding to 49 improve the program, especially for enhancements in student recruitment, parent involvement, and student support systems, as well as for curriculum development and staff development. 50 VIII. Academic Achievement. A. Generally. Section 2.7 LRSD shall implement programs, policies, and/or procedures designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of African-American students, including but not limited to Section 5 of this Revised Plan. Policies On August 24, 2000, the Board approved a new policy on Home Schooling (IKED). This policy reflects state law and State Board of Education regulations, as well as District views. In December 2000 the Board approved a revision to Policy IKF, General Education Graduation Requirements. The new policy moved much of the detail about required courses that was formerly in regulations into policy. Changes included the following:  Increasing for the Class of 2004 the number of required units from 24 to 26 and the number of units in the recommended curriculum from 27 to 28\n Modifying the recommended curriculum to include eight Pre-AP/AP or University Studies courses\n Establishing criteria for the Magnet Program Seal\n Establishing criteria for the Arkansas Scholars Seal\n Modifying slightly the requirements for the Honors Diploma Seal\nand  Changing the one unit requirement in oral communications to one-half unit in oral communications and an additional one-half unit in any English, communications, or journalism course. A new course in Modem Grammar is recommended. The Board adopted in February 2001 Policy lAA on Professional Development. This new policy states that the Board will \"commit the necessary time and other resources to a comprehensive professional development program that will be driven primarily by student performance data and result in improved educational achievement and equity of outcomes for all students.\" Procedures The regulations for Policy ID on the School Day were revised on May 25, 2000. Formerly, grade 12 students were not required to take more than four units of credit if that was all they needed to complete graduation requirements. The regulations were changed to require seniors to take eight courses, one of which could be a study hall or enrollment as a student monitor/assistant. The principal is authorized to modify this requirement if there are extenuating circumstances, which are defined. The Board reviewed on August 24, 2000, the new regulations for the policy on Remedial Instruction, 1HBDA-R2. These regulations establish the Student Academic Improvement Plan (\"SAIP\"). Effective fall 2000, a SAIP is to be developed for all students who are (1) not performing on grade level (K-4)\n(2) not proficient on any part of the state's Benchmark examinations -primary (grade 4), intermediate (grade 51 6), middle (grade 8)\nand (3) not scoring \"proficient\" on End-of-Course examinations in literacy, geometry, and/or algebra. An electronic form was de\\eloped for teacher use, and all schools received a reference text and software to use in writing the SAIPs. During fall 2000 the Board amended regulations IK.f--R. They eliminated the former procedures that had been established to provide for semester test exemptions for students with good grades, attendance, and behavior I This change was in response to the expressed concerns of many parents and teachers that such exemptions were not in the best interests of students. The exception was reinstated in February 2001 for seniors only. The Board reviewed on October 21, 1999, and then reviewed proposed revisions on May 25, 2000, the regulations on Class Rankings/Grade-Point Averages, IKC-R. These regulations delineate the kinds of grades that will be included in the calculations for class rankings/grade-point averages\nthe kinds of grades that will not be included\nprocedures to be used when students re-enroll for a course to make up a failing grade or to improve a low grade\nhow to calculate transfer grades\nthe grade points of regular-level and AP course grades\nprocedures for determining rank-inclass\nprocedures to be used in determining senior honors\nand definitions of key terms. The May revisions included a new provision that allows a student who earns a grade of \"C\" or \"D\" to retake a course to improve the grade. Both the first and second grades will be included in the calculation of the grade-point average. A new set of regulations, IKEC-R, Credit for Courses Taken Through Distance Learning, was reviewed by the Board on September 14, 2000. These regulations allow District students to take certain high school courses through the Arkansas Virtual High School. Such opportunities open doors to meet more students' needs. The regulations note that these courses might especially be appropriate for \"students who need to make up failed courses, for the resolution of scheduling conflicts, for students transferring in from other high schools, to provide courses where there is a lack of certified teachers available, for home-bound students, for returning home school students who lack credits, for pregnant teens and teen parents, and others with extenuating circumstances.\" The Board reviewed on August 24, 2000, the proposed regulations IKED-R on Home Schooling. The procedures that were established include how to place home school students in grade levels or courses upon their entry or re-entry into the District. The Board reviewed in December 2000 new regulations for General Education Graduation Requirements, IKF-R. The new regulations delineate the procedures for placing students in English and social studies courses\nadded new technology courses that c.an satisfy the requirements for Technology Applications\nand added new Career Focus areas, including one for Teachers of Tomorrow, one in Aviation Technology, and another for the out-of-zone students transferring into Central High School. 52 The Board reviewed on January 11, 2001, proposed new Professional Development regulations, IAA-R. These regulations defined the required professional development hours\nthe necessity of a professional development individual improvement plan\nthe use of the school day for professional development\nprocedures for awarding salary credit\nprocedures for paying stipends\nprocedures for tuition reimbursement\nprocedures for earning time off on Turkey Day (the Wednesday before Thanksgiving)\nencouragement to teachers to become National Board certified\nthe status of AEA Days\na definition of the District's induction program for beginning teachers\nthe importance of professional development in school improvement plans\nand the requirement for program evaluation. On May 1, 2000, a new Administrative Directive ID was issued on the Length of the Instructional Day. Administrative Directive IIB on Minimum Class Enrollment was issued on May 1, 2000. Administrative Directive IKA(2) on Grading Procedures was issued on January 21, 2000. Administrative Directive IKAB on Reporting Pupil Progress was issued on May 1, 2000. Administrative Directive IKC on Implementation of Policy IKC was issued on May 1,2000. Administrative Directive IKF A on Scheduling High School Students was issued on May5,2000. The Middle School Curriculum Catalog, 2001-02, was published and distributed during January 2001. The High School Curriculum Catalog, 2001-02, was published and distributed during January 2001. The Middle School Parent/Student Guide to Course Selection, 2001-02, was published and distributed to schools during January 2001. The High School Parent/Student Guide to Course Selection and Graduation Requirements, 2001-02, was published and distributed to schools during January 2001. Priority Intervention Procedures In early September 2000 the District adopted a set of Priority Intervention Procedures (\"PIP\"). PIP is the system for providing support, corrective actions, and sanctions for schools identified by the Arkansas Department of Education for improvement. This 53 system includes both a set of supportive interventions to help schools improve and a set of corrective actions if schools fail to improve. The procedures include a variety of interventions for schools identified for improvement: I  Accessible data for principals, Campus Leadership Teams, and others involved in school improvement\n Professional development for teachers, principals, and instructional support personnel\n School Improvement Plan coaching for principals and Campus Leadership Teams\n School Improvement Audits and/or Curriculum Audits conducted by District staff and then shared with the principal, Campus Leadership Team, and the faculty\n Technical assistance, on demand, for all schools.  Equitable resources to all schools\nprovision for extra resources for schools in need\nand  Principal evaluation system that is aligned with the accountability system. The PIP also includes a list of possible corrective actions for schools that are identified for improvement:  Diminished autonomy\n Required professional development for the principal and/or other staff.  Negative impact on evaluations for the principal and/or other staff\n Removal of the principal after two consecutive years of a school being identified for improvement\nand  Removal of 50 percent of more of a school's teachers after three consecutive years of a school being identified for improvement. At the September 2000 Leadership Team meeting (principals and central office brokers), the PIP was presented, and a meeting schedule with clusters of principals was distributed. During early October representatives of the School Services and the Instruction Divisions met with each group of four to five principals to talk with them about what is available to support school improvement, to listen to a presentation on their School Improvement Plans, and to listen to their needs for assistance and support. Staff members took notes at these meetings so that follow-up could occur. Subsequent meetings with the same groups of principals were conducted to discuss the results of assessments as they became available. Additionally, the School Services staff conducted monthly follow-up meetings with principals, and two of the PIP gr_oups of principals are meeting to plan together for improvement. Mid-year conferences have been scheduled to follow up on recommendations made as a result of the group pre-conferences conducted in October. 54 Another planned follow-up is to provide training for the Di,ision oflnstruction staff, as well as principals and assistant principals, in the use of the School Observation Measure developed by Dr. Steve Ross and his associates at the University of Memphis. This instrument allows observers to visit classrooms and then to construct a school profile of the instructional program. These data will be used as a part of the Curriculum Audits proposed as a possible intervention in the PIP. The training will be conducted for fall 2001 implementation. Programs Assessments Achievement Level Tests The District's Achievement Level Tests (\"ALTs\") in reading, language, and mathematics are administered in grades 3-11. The ALT is administered early each fall and again in late spring so that the year's growth can be measured. These tests are criterion-referenced in that they are closely aligned with the District's curriculum content standards and grade-level benchmarks. The scores are on a continuum that allows parents, teachers, students, and others to determine a student's growth during a given year, as well as over time. Also, the scoring software allows the staff to compare a student's performance with that of all the students in the nation who also take the ALTs, and a percentile score is derived. This percentile is not the same as the one used to score the SAT9 tests. The ALT national sample is inclusive of all students who take the test, and there has been no attempt to establish a norm based on representative students acc'0rding to region, poverty, race/ethnicity, gender, and so forth. Criterion-Referenced Tests-Literacy, Grades 3-5 Also, second and third quarter criterion referenced tests are administered to third, fourth and fifth grade students. These tests are designed by the District's teacher leaders with input from classroom teachers. They are closely aligned with the District's elementary curriculum content standards and grade-level benchmarks so that they give the school and parents good information about the status of a student's performance in terms of achieving the standards. They are also intended to be predictive of how a student will perfonn on more formal measures unless appropriate interventions are made to improve perfonnance. Criterion-Referenced Tests-Literacy, Grades 6-12 To measure students' growth against the District and State benchmarks, criterion referenced tests (\"CRTs\") were developed by the English curriculum staff in the areas ofreading, writing, and grammar. These tests are used by each classroom teacher to measure students' growth and to plan instruction. Tests were carefully written to model form and procedure of the SAT9, the State Benchmark Exam, End of Course Literacy Test, and the AL Ts. Items are annotated to reflect benchmark(s) tested. The CRT's are designed to be given during the second and third quarters, but teachers have the prerogative1to administer tests during a period of several weeks for maximum value and individual needs. 55 Criterion Referenced Test (End ofUnit/Module Exams), Mathematics and Science CRTs were also developed by the District's Mathematics-and Science Departments in collaboration with PRE. This CRT measures performance at critical junctures in the new math and science curricula: specifically at the end of each mathematics \"module\" and each science \"unit.\" The test directly assesses student performance on District benchmarks in math and science. Each benchmark includes 4 test items. Stu~ents are expected to answer at least 3 of those items correctly to be proficient on the benchmark. In addition the test includes openended, free-response items that are formatted like the open-ended items on the Siate Benchmark Exam. Results on the CRT inform teachers, principals, and the District about how students are achieving the District benchmarks. A process is being implemented to efficiently convey test results to teachers, parents, and principals in order to achieve the CRT goal of identifying student performance in relation to our own curriculum and to identify students in need of additional instruction. To facilitate administration of the math and science multi-module CRTs, a systematic approach is being used for scanning, scoring, and the generation of reports for teacher, parents, and principals. The reports will include an \"item analysis\" that reveals how students performed on the test question by question. This will give the teacher detailed information about the content and skil\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eLittle Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0202","title":"Oral history interview with Edwin Caldwell, March 2, 2001","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["White, Oliver (Oliver Gordon)","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Orange County, 36.0613, -79.1206","United States, North Carolina, Orange County, Chapel Hill, 35.9132, -79.05584"],"dcterms_creator":["Caldwell, Edwin, 1935-"],"dc_date":["2001-03-02"],"dcterms_description":["Edwin Caldwell Jr. describes a lifetime of civil rights activism and political involvement. A natural political organizer, Caldwell helped Howard Lee become the first black mayor of Chapel Hill. Despite losing a number of his own campaigns for office, Caldwell enjoyed a growing reputation as a political force in North Carolina. This reputation earned him a seat on the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board and various others positions of influence. Caldwell discusses the mechanics behind some of these positions and the influence of his race on his political life.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Chapel Hill (N.C.)--Politics and government","Chapel Hill (N.C.)--Race relations","Church of Reconciliation (Chapel Hill, N.C.)","African American politicians--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Chapel Hill (N.C.)--Politics and government--20th century","Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (N.C.). Board of Education"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Edwin Caldwell, March 2, 2001"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0202/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Duration: 02:59:20"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Caldwell, Edwin, 1935-","Lee, Howard, 1934-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_308","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":["2001-03/2001-07"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","School administrators","Educational planning","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational statistics"],"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/308"],"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\ne  *- GADBERRY, BRADY L. From: Sent\nTo: Subject: CARMINE, LESLIE V. Friday, March 02, 2001 12:45 PM LESLEY. BONNIE\nBABBS, JUNIOUS\nSTEWART DONALD M  GADBERRY. BRADY L.\nMITCHELL. SADIE ' FW: Mathematics program evaluation Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc Subjecfc LESLEY, BONNIE Thursday, Mardl 01, 2001 1:25 PM CA^NE^ LEtS V ^bBERRY, BRADY L\nSTEWART, DONALD M. r^athematics program evaluation We have yet another sflrifiUfi problem concerning program evaluation, Ooew^w^ contains numarous erws of facf and anerpretetion-ao many that i1 is going to taxa me a tot of ame to 2- The District is paying Virginia Johnson full-time to do the math/science evaluation for NSF and what Nunnprv hac \"T? '1 fVirginia has done and submitted to NSK We ^n Mt Into a l o^M^usion Interpretations of the project! And we are terribly vulnerable to justified criticisr^ we say two ^^reri? . .dP Dennis and I wrote for the Compliance Report-so if Nunnery's reoort is submitted and It dMsn't Jive with the Compliance Report, we are going to look like fools again submitted and 4. The Nunnery report makes many of the same errors that PRE made originally It devoid of context\nit is incomplete in its data analysis\nthe Interoretations are nor infnr wrtten is nt^at all aligned with the reports that Virginia NSF 3. etc. is incomplete in its data analysis\nthe Interpretations are not mform^^bniTiatwTare District decide to spend yet more money on the NSF evaluation? esoeciallv t. neversuppos^ Bdo. .epaU evaluallop cTmSae^S hare or jS rSrSnSS Sb? iteTOF rfp^lL *iaveh,ent as b a,adoral cdor, information in one place. Why in the world are we allowina to continue decision-making the one person who can help the District avoid these embarrassing w^i^hdtoi^TT ''D' xpensive problems? The two meetings of the Research Committee have been scheduled absolutely could not attenrf-which happened as well in the scheduled meetings with Steve Ross I do not t that all these inci'dents are ^incidento^^ s=bdulS mtrngsStevl R^^  indication of what we are going to get with the other reports-then we don't just have one oroblem have multiple problems. I am VERY wearv of trvino to clean un the mecc uuhen we rriHrr4 r -------iP*i__ __ place. Itiple weary trying toclean up mess ^rn w^didn^ to hav?one in toe^t It makes NO sense to me, given the last year's events, to allow Kathy Lease to continue overseeino the orooram evaluation reouirements for this riiKthrt That le ,h., i h,o _______r-rZ J.l Z  2.\" Program I ra w *M wiiww ixaoiy bcci3w Lw wUliUllUC UVciScG e^luation requirements district. is why I have removed Virginia Johnson from PRE OFTI^A VA/lfn \\/in A* A A a.Uikt! I U.^. _______a a.*.. . * 'uL , , mar is wny i nave removed Virginia Johnson from PRE and moved her into the office with Vanwsa. ^d that is why I have assigned Eddie McCoy to do the ESL evaluation for this school year At least StSoffier^oS SpoS accePteble quality and do not contradict what we havi SvI%Tre,!^mmeX'inn \u0026lt;his. Otherwise, I would just let it go. You have my concerns. You I lavo iiiy I owi III I loriQowOn. Below is a list of errors that I identified in the report from just one quick read-through 1. First sentence\nThe grant began in 1998-99, not 1997-98 not'2?^Athynn^?dL^^^^^ ?.''o,^''''' performance in mathematics and science\" are not something we dreamed upbut required in the NSF program evaluation iak?hoS,tot\u0026amp;oS \" 854. Lots Of capitalization and punctuation errors. 5. Tkis dra^l uses 190 as ike baseline for SATS ficopss. Tho cdhipliancs reporf used f 55T-Sfisince il was iln year before we began to implement changes 6. Disaggregation is unclear, is it \"white\" or is it \"non-black\" scores that are reported'? a M??nDDDnDT?I ' ' * sutints themselves changel n^'^mcSr WAroHid,r science scores tell us anything since that test is in no way aligned with the 12 Achievement gap scores are not as easy to interpret on the SAT9 as they are on the Benchmark Al-sn iftr..i \u0026amp; aS science and math that are outlined and analyzed in the Compliance Report Those are the courses that should be examined. Near the end of the first paragraph ' -----------------  . A? 'J? -^Sebra I in Sth grade faifed the cou'rse.\" Our very'high^t achievinqVfadente are wha?so'^vll^] \" tt^at concYusion ^thouf a^^^ rVi laloU9Var 1 we have so far any is a gross error. He states that \"relatively large \"district is providing increasingly equitable access to Algebra 1.\" Well thats true but it is n or S^atiS ***  GeomeS and either 4ai!?LVonSis^j^he'Co''4 \"\"\" The f\u0026lt;evise\u0026lt;i Desegregation Plan-is the title of another section of the paper f 5,  G^I'Sation 2.6-the one having to do with access to and success in advanced, g/t, and AP courses^e programs that are outlined are for the most part remedial-implemented to ensure success in regular-level courses not to ensure access to or success in advanced courses, necessarily. The interpretation is all wrongX Sm and rSpTfanceWpoS\"^ achievement in this area. All those programs, etc. are outlinXthe '?  rekrence t^olicy IG as being the one allowing dual-credit courses. That is an error Policy IG has to do with curriculum adoption. There is another policy and set of regs having to do with college enrollment (IHOTA and WCDA- writer apparently had no understanding of the University Studies courses as our best examole of the PP\u0026lt;^\u0026lt;jnity to earn coIImc credit while still in high school. All that information is in the Compliance Report. *2 2.6.1. which is the section on teacher/counselor training having to ao will  ff*' fond in the Compliance Report. Are you seeing the pattern here Pf 'ofo fais paper the stuff that we have already described and analyzed in the Compliance Report? 20. 1 he writer attempted to analyze increased enrollment in AP math and science-hut aoain had no data and nn .which is the section on teacher/counselor training having to do with .rrfr,rmaHr,r, analyzc^incre^ed enrollment in AP math and science-but again had no data and no information about the many actions taken to accomplish what we have. What we have done for remediation. An w^at we have done. including most of the prMrams that he erroneously listed under the advanced course section 22. It seems to me that if he wants to evaluation Section 2.71 that a desnrintinn nf th^ now ifhe description of the new assessments would be ap^ropnate, as well as a discussion of the Quality Index, the ACTAAP accountability requirements, etc. None of ^t is 23. Obligation 2.8. This section is pitifulagain because the writer did not understand the wunyoMun i D. , Hio ,s piuiui-again oecause the writer did not understand the program or what we have done have1)X a^bfg failure of which have been wonderfully suc^ssful, and others of which most part, student 24. This section also falls to include in the analysis all of several other partnerships. 25. Now, here's the clincher\nUnder \"Findings and Conclusions,\" the writer states that \"For the most di outi^mes in Mathematics (sc) and Science (sic) did not change substantially between 1997 and 2001 m! profound finding on one measurement alone-the SAT9. No ^nchmark data. No ALT data? No CRT date of t^he tremendous increases in course enrollments, participation, etc., etc.,, etc. VJe have paid big 'P'^' 'f'\" fo \u0026gt;0 Po whatever ho has done, and now to Nunnery to declare that we tha\\1\u0026lt;wkrat/Sl^^e^ate^at we^have*^ absolutely wrong And we are continuing to pay staff to work on the NSF reporf for LRSD students\" noi Inn^aragraph about the'implementation dip,\" one of the phrases that I've heard Kathy use a lot of fim^. The fact of the matter is that we did NOT have an implementation dip. Fourth grade went up A LOT in the first year of implementationif we look at the one test that is best aligned with what we are doingthe Benchmark SAT9 declines are NOT due to implementation dips. They are due to the fact that the SAT9 does not correlate with the wmculum framework or the new curriculum and assessments we are using. Goodness! 27. The discussion about achievement gaps is based upon the same flaws in information and understanding. 86dLunX,'^n \"? 2?^ '\"' draining program-and the feet is that we have tons of also have an assessment of the oTamTkTImplementation. We also have an assessment of the quality of teacher implementation of the new curriculum-again in the Compliance Report. Vn dSRod Whdt wo hsd or for infinrmafion rwi fha tflOSe d3t3 tO N^^^d Kathy never analysis of what went wrong last year). One of 30. The Recommendations section is nothing but shallow-but then oiven what th^ writer knouu th.- ...__ . c^ld we ex^ We have some critical issJes that should ^e^ to arfo even s^ed some o^em already this school year based on our own analysis of what went wrong last vear) One of the basics in program evaluation is to derive the recommendations for improved^Kdafe^lh^te the program staff who can shed light on interpretations and on identifying what went wrong or what ' P0\"ay hink about this stuff ail the tiriie, and so d\u0026lt;^ Dwn^nlj w do^Xs^ W^^va ewry right to be outraged that people without any direct Information, with giant gaps of information without observation of knowledge of what we are doing and why. without infixmation about NSF wrthout anv ^empt to find out what we kriTO would deem it even possible to make judgments about the work about what the outcomes mean, or what should happen next. For goodness sake! * coounne worn, aoomwnattne the Dr. Bonnie A. Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski UtOe Rock, Arkansas 72206 SO1/324-2131 501/324-0567 (fax) GADBERRY, BRADY L. From: Sent: To: Subject: CARNINE, LESLIE V. Friday, March 02, 2001 12:31 PM GADBERRY, BRADY L\nSTEWART, DONALD M. I , I W I hB.y W I V vr~il \\ I , Ivll FW\nCentral High School Parking and/or Baseball Field K  3lwa^ thrTO side to the story but this Is going to go public and there will be a lot of finger not be a good Kme to visit with Baldwin Shell about the logistics of the Central renovation. That could then determine the number of portables and feasibility of the faculty parking and the other issues. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc Subject HOWARD, RUDOLPH Wednesday, February 28. 2001 S\n39 PM EATON, DOUGLAS LACEY, MARIAN G.\nGADBERRY, BRADY L\nCARNINE, LESLIE V. Central High School Parking anq/or Baseball Reid We keep going \"around and around\" in an effort to avoid the issue. det^ine whethw or not the district was going to support the building of a baseball field SPMifically.how mu^ was the district going to contnbute in order to match what the baseball boosters(Mr.Yancey) would contribute. After waitmn fnr a rmuhnn Inr nu^r 9 mnr.ke 1 _____t.___r,___ . '.. y'*!) waiting fora mating for over 2 months. I receive this memo ffom DouT^O^^^^ already been covered. Specifically, the issue about the parking lot and the portables. wouW give up the teacher parking lot in order to accommodate the portables. WE ARE NOT AGREEABLE TO GIVING UP ANY ADDITlOl^L SPACE ON THE PRACTICE FIELD. additional space for portables, but you ner tell us how many portables that n^ded. Therefore, we can never determine if the space on the parking lot and/or the space around uenvai is adequate or not. 875013744137 WALKER LAW FIRM 050 P02 JUL 24 01 11:20 GADBERRY, BRADY L From: Sent: To: Subject: CARNINE, LESLIE V. Friday, March 02, 2001 12:45 PM LESLEY, BONNIE: BABBS. JUNIOUS\nSTEWART, DONALD M.\nGADBERRY, BRADY L\nMITCHELL, SADIE FW: Mathematics program evaluation I understand your concern and there are some issues that should be discussed but this no more serious than the errors found in the NSF evaluation grant that we sent to the visiting team. I am sorry but I hope the other Associates can be objective. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE hiursaay, March 01, 2001 1:25 PM BAB8S, JUNIOUS, MITCHELL, SADIE\nGADBERRY, BRADY L\nSTEWART, DONALD M. CARNINE, LESUE V. Mathematics program evaluation We have yet another serious problem concerning program evaluation. I received on Monday afternoon a copy of the draft of the mathematics program evaluation that Kathy has apparently asked John Nunnery to do. I have these urgent concerns\n1. The draft contains numerous errors of fact and interpretation-so many that if is going to take me a lot of time to document. 2. The District is paying Virginia Johnson full-time to do the math/science evaluation for NSF, and what Nunnery has written is not at all aligned with the reports that Virginia has done and submitted to NSF. We can get Into a lot of confusion with such different interpretations of the project! And we are terribly vulnerable to justified criticism if we say two different things. 3. The draft is not aligned with what Dennis and I wrote for the Compliance Report-so if Nunnery's report is submitted and it doesn't \"jive\" with the Compliance Report, we are going to look like fools a^ain. 4. The Nunnery report makes many of the same errors that PRE made originally. It is based on wrong assumptions\nit is devoid of context\nit is incomplete in its data analysis\nthe Interpretations are not informed by what we are doing this year, etc. My question is this: Why in the world did the District decide to spend yet more money on the NSF evaluation? especially when what is written is of such poor quality? PRE was never supposed to do a separate evaluation of math/science from what we are required to do for NSF. NSF is just as concerned about African American achievement as is die federal court here or Joshua. Aii the relevant information will be in the NSF reports. And again, I am the only person vi^o has all the of information in one place. Why in the world are we allowing to continue the practice of excluding from decision-making the one person who can help the District avoid these embarrassing problems? these very expensive problems? The two meetings of the Research Committee have been scheduled at times when I absolutely could not attend-which happened as well in the scheduled meetings with Steve Ross. I do not believe that all these incidents are coincidental. If this first paper is any indication of what we are going to get with the other reports-then we dont just have one problem. We have multiple problems. I am VERY weary of trying to clean up the mess when we didn't need to have one in the first place. It makes NO sense to me, given the last year's events, to allow Kathy Lease to continue overseeing the program evaluation requirements for this district. That is why I have removed Virginia Johnson from PRE and moved her into the office with Vanessa. And that is why I have assigned Eddie McCoy to do the ESL evaluation for this school year. At least this way I can be sure that the reports to NSF and OCR are of acceptable quality and do not contradict what we have written in other official reports. There are serious legal and financial implications in all this. Otherwise. I would just let it go. You have my concerns. You have my recommendation. Below is a list of errors that I identified in the report from just one quick read-through. 1. First sentence\nThe grant began in 1998-99, not 1997-98. 2. The \"drivers that he says \"ostensibly influence overall levels of student performance in mathematics and science\" are not something we dreamed upbut required in the NSF program evaluation. 3. The example given about CPMSA activities makes no sense. Everything the project has done involves ail those stakeholders, not just policy formulation.\" 855013744187 UALKEP LhU firm 050 P03 JUL 24 01 11:21 4. Lots of capitalization and punctuation errors. 5. Tkis draft uses imi as Ike basalins for 8AT9 scoras. Tka ccmplianca reporl used ^95?-58-Slnce it was Ike year before we began to implement changes. 6. Disaggregation is unclear. Is it \"white\" or is it \"non-black\" scores that are reported? 7. A big problem with cohort studies is also that students themselves changel 8. MAJOR PROBLEM: Scores are reported without any context that describes where we were in program implementation. No where does the paper establish when specific grade levels were implemented-and that is the only way to look at the data in any meaningful way. Grade 10 scores, for example, could not have been impacted before f^l 2000 because we didn't have any interventions before then that could have made a difference. 9. ANOTHER MAJOR PROBLEM: This report excludes the all-important Benchmark data. The grade 4 data are the BEST evidence that we have so far that the project is working. The grade 8 data are the best evidence that we have so far that change is imperative. 10. It is a terrible error to assume that SATO science scores tell us anything since that test is in no way aligned with the new curricula. We could use the scores, I suppose, but they surely need to be Interpreted with caution. Again, there is no context laid for making interpretations in this draft. 11. Inteipretations of the cohort data are the same problem. He looked at T-scorss for grades 5 and 7 without any explanation of when the reforms were implemented. 12. Achievement gap scores are not as easy to interpret on the SAT9 as they are on the Benchmark. Also, if we are truly trying to figure out if black kids are gaining, we need to look at their movement from Below Basic to Basic since when we started all this, the vast majority 13. There is a section called \"A\u0026lt;  were in the Below Basic level. access to High-Level Math and Science Courses.\" The ONLY course that is examined is Algebra l~hardly a high-level course, especially now that it is required of all students. We have pre- and post-data on course enrollments for both science and math that are outlined and analyzed in the Compliance Report. Those are the courses that should be examined. Near the end of the first paragraph is a gross error. He states that \"relatively large proportions of students who enrolled in Algebra I in Sth grace failed the course.\" Our very highest achieving students. the ones who take Algebra I in grade 8, and almost none of them fail! He drew that conclusion without any data are whatsoever! 14. The paper states that the \"district is providing increasingly equitable access to Algebra 1.\" Well, that's true, but it is grossly understated. We are requiring ALL students now to take not only Algebra I, but also Geometry and either Algebra II or Statistics. 15. This section fails to look at any of the data on Pre-AP, and there is a note that he didn't have the AP data to examine. Again, all of this is in the Compliance Report. 16. Fulfillment of Obligations Contained in the Revised Desegregation Plan-is the title of another section of the paper. The first topic is Obligation 2.6-the one having to do with access to and success in advanced, g/t, and AP courses. The programs that are outlined are for the most part remedial-implemented to ensure success in regular-level courses, not to ensure access to or success in advanced courses, necessarily. The interpretation is all wrong. Also, the section iarnores many other initiatives taken by the District to impact achievement in this area. All those programs, etc. are ouBineo in the Interim and final Compliance Reports. 17. There is a reference to policy IG as being the one allowing dual-credit courses. That is an error. Policy IG has to do with curriculum adoption. There is another policy and set of regs having to do with college enrollment (IHCDAand IHCDA- R). 18. Further, the writer apparently had no understanding of the University Studies courses as our best example of the opportunity to earn college credit while still in high school. All that information is in the Compliance Report. 19. The writer attempted to write about Section 2.6.1, which is the section on teacher/counselor training having to do with advanced courses. He had no data-and all of that is found in the Compliance Report. Are you seeing the pattern here? Why put into this paper the stuff that we have already described and analyzed in the Compliance Report? 20. The writer attempted to analyze increased enrollment in AP math and science-but again had no data and no information about the many actions taken to accomplish what we have. 21. The writer attempted to analyze Section 2.7, but he only mentioned SAIPs as what we have done for remediation. An examination of the Interim and final Compliance Reports would reveal MANY more examples of what we have done, including most of the programs that he erroneously listed under the advanced course section. 22. It seems to me that if he wants to evaluation Section 2.71 that a description of the new assessments would be appropriate, as well as a discussion of the Quality Index, the ACTAAP accountability requirements, etc. None of that is here. 23. Obligation 2.8. This section is pitiful-again because the writer did not understand the program or what we have done to engage parents, and we've done a million things, some of which have been wonderfully successful, and others of which have been a big failure. 24. This section also fails to Include in the analysis all of several other partnerships. 25. Now, here's the clincher\nUnder \"Findings and Conclusions,\" the writer states that \"For the most part, student outcomes in Mathematics (sic) and Science (sic) did not change substantially between 1997 and 2001 for LRSD students\" He based that profound finding on one measurement alone-the SAT9. No Benchmark data. No ALT data. No CRT data. No acknowledgement of the tremendous increases in course enrollments, participation, etc., etc.,, etc. We have paid big bucksto staff to write a first report, then to Ross to do whatever he has done, and now to Nunnery to declare that we have failed-and for that declaration to be absolutely wrong. And we are continuing to pay staff to work on the NSF report that looks at ALL the data that we have. 26. Then there Is a big long paragraph about the \"implementation dip,\" one of the phrases that I've heard Kathy use a lot of times. The fact of the matter is that we did NOT have an implementation dip. Fourth grade went up A LOT in the first year of implementatlon~if we look at the one test that is best aligned with what we are doing-the Benchmark. SAT9 declines are NOT due to implementation dips. They are due to the fact that the SAT9 does not correlate with the curriculum framework or the new curriculum and assessments we are using. Goodness! 27. The discussion about achievement gaps is based upon the same flaws in information and understanding. 865013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 050 P04 JUL 24 01 11:22 2^ The paragraph on access to higher-level courses is very disappointing. Again, he only looked at Algebra I. There is innovative freshrnan Physics course. There Is no mention of the data we already have In the NSF data reports about course completions. This section is tembly Inadequate. And again, much of it is already rn the Com^iance Report. 29. The writer states that we have no documentation about our training program-and the fact is that we have tons of documentation throughout the Compliance Report-both on advanced courses and on the curriculum Implementation. We also have an assessment of the quality of teacher implementation of the new curriculum-again in the Compliance Report. I want to note here again the arrogance of PRE in even attempting to make judgments about these programs without meeting with the program staff and me to ensure that they know what they need to know to write a report. We are collecting data everywhere, and we are analyzing those data, and we are reporting those data to NSF-and Kathy never even asked what we had or for information on the phase-in of the reforms, for documentation on training, etc., etc., etc My insistence on being included was to prevent these kinds of errors and misinterpretations. 30. The Recommendations section is nothing but shallowbut then given what the writer knew of the program, what else could we expect? We have some critical issues that should be addressed (and we are in fact addressing many of them and even solved some of them already this school year based on our own analysis of what went wrong last year). One of the basics in program evaluation is to derive the recommendations for improvement both from data analysis and from deep conversations with the program staff who can shed light on interpretations and on identifying what went wrong or what could be done better. I personally think about this stuff all the time, and so does Dennis ano so does Vanessa. We have every right to be outraged that people without any direct information, with giant gaps of information, without observation of the program implementation, without knowledge of what we are doing and why. without information about NSF. without any attempt to find out what we know would deem it even possible to make judgments about the work, about what the outcomes mean, or what should happen next. For goodness sake! Or. Bonnie A. Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 501/324-2131 501/324-0567 (fex) GADBERRY, BRADY L. From: Sent: To: Subject: CARNINE, LESLIE V. Friday, March 02, 2001 12:31 PM GADBERRY, BRADY L\nSTEWART, DONALD M. FW: Central High School Parking and/or Baseball Field As both of you know there is always three side to the story but this Is going to go public and there will be a lot of finger pointing, would this not be a good time to visit with Baldwin Shell about the logistics of the Central renovation. That could then determine the number of portables and feasibility of the faculty parking and the other issues. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc Subject: HOWARD, RUDOLPH Wednesday, Fetxuary 28, 2001 5:39 PM EATON, DOUGLAS LACEY, MARIAN 6.\nGADBERRY, BRADY L\nCARNtNE, LESUE V. Central Htgri School Parking and/or Baseball Reid We keep going \"around and around\" in an effort to avoid the issue. I asked for a meeting to determine whether or not the district was going to support the building of a baseball field. Specifically, how much was the district going to contribute in order to match what the baseball boosters(Mr.Yancey) would contribute. After waiting for a meeting for over 2 months. I receive this memo from Doug- 2/22/01- rehashing what has already been covered. Specifically, the issue about the parking lot and the portables. Now. I have indicated and the CLT has indicated that we would give up the teacher parking lot in order to accommodate the portables. WE ARE NOT AGREEABLE TO GIVING UP ANY ADDITIONAL SPACE ON THE PRACTICE FIELD. Doug, you continue to talk about the need for additional space for portables, but you ner tell us how many portables that are going to be needed. Therefore, we can never determine if the space on the parking lot and/or the space around Central is adequate or not. 875013744187 walker LAW FIRM 050 P01 JUL 24 01 11:20 JOHN IT. WALKER. P.A. Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-5758 Fax (501) 574-4187 TRANSMISSION COVERSHEET Date: [, To: [. ] Fax: L 1 Re: L J Sender: J YOU SHOULD RECEIVE [ rmcluding cover sheet)] PAGE(S), INCLUDING THIS COVERSHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL \"\u0026lt;(501) 574-3758\u0026gt;\" The information contained in this facsimile message is attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not die intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, piease immediate notify us by telephone, and return the original message to us at the above address via the U.S. Postal Service. Thank you. I JOHN w. walker SHAWN CHILDS 5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 Via Facsimile 682-3479 March 26, 2001 388 P02Z05 MAR 26 01 13:17 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 HENDsnsoN Road LlTn. Rock, Askans.vs 72210 Phone: (5U1) 372-3425  Fax (SOl) 372-3428 Em-aiL: inchenryd@8wboU.nrc Representative Pat arker Bond House Of Represer\natives State Capitol, Rooi i 350 Little Rock, AR 7201 Dear Ms. Bond: 1 understanc annex or detach the that your bill which is now under consideration by the Legislature to deJacksonville area from the Pulaski County Special School District has not received comments from us and possibly from other interested panics in the long stating Pulaski County Desegregat on case. 1 am writing to inform you that while the bill may be popular with some of the Jacksoj ' desegregation plan\nville constituents, it may also have negative impact upon the court approved and that any legislation being considered will have to pass muster under the 14* Amendment as kvell as the law of the case concept. As you are\nrobably aware, no one has sought input from the Joshua Intervenors with respect to the legist ition or to the charter school which was approved for the Maumelle area. While our approval resort to the Coun is not required, our lack of knowledge and input will tend to cause us to o have matters ferreted out. Rather than get into a public dispute with you and the other propc nents of your legislation, 1 respectfully request that you and the other proponent legislate s meet with possibly the ODM, school officials and myself so that you have a better under landing of why opposition from Joshua, at least, is well placed. can Would you suggest that you sp :indly get in touch with me regarding this matter as soon as possible. I also with Ms. Ann Marshall of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring in order to obtain that office s perspective regarding pending legislation. !hn W. Walker f JWjS 5013744187 walker LAW FIRM 388 P03/05 MAR 26 01 13:17 cc\nMs. Ann Marshal Dr. Gary Smith Dr. Leslie Carni Mr. James Smitj Mr. Ray Simon le Ail Counsel of I ecord5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRd 388 P05/05 MAR 26 01 13:18 With due re peci lo the court, I remain, JWWjs cc: Mr. Chris Helle Ms. ,Ajin Brown Mr, Sam Jones Mr. Steve Jone: Mr. Richard Ro / Walker Sincerely yours, .chcll Mr. Timothy Gs iger '' I^EQSIVSO ^AR 3 0 200! GrBCECf ^^SESREGfiJJQSi^^- ^JIS C\u0026gt; CF 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 March 26, 2001 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone\n(501) 372-3425  F.ax (501) 372-3428 Email\nrachenryd@swbell.net Honorable Judge Susan Webber Wright Chief Judge United States District Court 600 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: LRSD v PCSSD Dear Judge Wright: Due to the fact that I was in trial before the Honorable George Howard Jr. in Pine Bluff, Arkansas from March 19-22, 2001 and in intense preparation for the days preceding the 19* I am just getting in position to address the Little Rock filing. Notice of Filing Compliance Report and Request for Scheduling Order. I further note that Little Rock has indicated that it wishes to limit our time for filing challenges to twenty (20) days. This letter is being written to request that the Court set a time for a conference before addressing the issue of a scheduling order so that all parties, as well as the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, would have an opportunity to address the propriety of the scheduling order request. The compliance report is extensive. It appears to be more than two hundred (200) pages in length, is very detail oriented and it makes many claims which are unfamiliar to us and probably to the ODM as well. I am writing the Court this letter, rather than filin\nHeller, who I am advised is away until Wednesday, expressed an ig a motion, because Mr. interest in having some dialogue regarding this matter, and the State settlement as well, before this matter becomes, if it ever does. a public dispute which the Court must resolve. I understand that the Court intends to schedule a hearing in the near future regarding the middle school issues raised by the PCSSD. May I suggest that the matter of the hearing of the scheduling order be set for the same day inasmuch as all parties are expected to be in court for the PCSSD matter. Although I have been unable to speak with Mr. Heller and I have not attempted to reach his co-counsel, Mr. Clay Fendley who I intend to try and reach immediately, I have informed Ms. Ann Marshall regarding my concerns herein and will be having further conversations with the parties until such time I receive the Courts reply to this letter.With due respect to the court, I remain, JWW.js cc: Mr. Chris Heller Ms Ann Brown Mr. Sam Jones Mr. Steve Jones Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Timothy Gauger Sincerely yours. n W. Walker ro mx JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS John w. Walker, p.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 1 4 ZOQi. urfluE OF B^eSA'nGK5fiOtSITORIM\u0026amp; OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY. P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Hender.5O.\\ Road Little Rock. Ark.a.\\s.as 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  F.ax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenrydSswbell.net Via Facsimile - 310-822-4824 April 9, 2001 Tr'mfl'i on g^ECESVc Dr. Terrence Roberts 932 South Oakland Pasenda, CA 91106 Re: LRSD Dear Terrence:' Joy gave me a report of your brief conversation with her on Friday. I am writing to inquire of your opinion as to whether the Little Rock School District has made it to the point where it can be established to be a unitary school system. I need a written response to this by the end of the week. The expectancy of the plan was that the Joshua consultant would be closely associated with Joshua as policies and procedures were being developed and established. In addition, the plan contemplated that we would be integrally involved in all aspects of policy devisation and promulgation. I thought we had established that during our several conversations with you. We had the same expectancy from Dr. Ross. To date, our involvement has been superficial and mostly nonexistent except for our initiative. Accordingly, when you provide your opinion regarding the readiness of the District for unitary status, would you kindly address our non involvement, i.e., in communication with you and District officials and in the reporting process in which you were involved. We believe that good faith was required of school officials in implementing the plan and that at minimal we were not to be circumvented by any persons in the process. I am sending Mr. Junious Babbs a copy of this letter because Junious has not kept us involved and, in our opinion, has actively sought to prevent our involvement, I believe, as provided for in the plan. His position seems to be that if you were invo.lved then we were involved, for you were our consultant rather than theirs. At a hearing, he, of course, will be a necessary witness regarding this point. Please let me hear from you as requested. Furthermore, if Mr. Babbs chooses to address these points with you, would you please let us know his position in your response to us. Office of Desegregation Monitoring FILE COPYWith warm personal regards, 1 remain, Sincerely, John W. Walker JWW:js cc: Mr. Junious Babbs Ms. Ann BrownAn. O' OOXQZ.H-^Z01 L K S D Rpr 1601 10:17a RITA ROBERTS SRD 626-793-7654 PAGE 02 P-2 Terrence J. Roberts, Ph.D. P.O. Box 96 Pasadena, CA 91102 (626) 644-4956 April 16, 2001 John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 RE: Your April 9,2001 letter to me Dear John: As always, it was good to hear from you, and I trust the report frna Joy was useful and informative. I will schedule lime lo meet with you when I am in Little Rock in the future. The work in the School District is going well and my feeling is that the employees have found the Coping With Difference program to be challenging and substantive. You ask, in your letter, about my opinion as to whether or not the School District has marie it to the point where it can be established as a unitary school system. Briefly, in my opinion, possibly. But, it is imperative to note that there arc many factors to be weighed and my opinion is but one of many to be considered. I add this because until all interested parties can come together and the available evidence, it is simply, and only, a matter of opinion. I feel ill equipped to comment on your level of non involvement in this process since I dont have enough information about communications between you and the District When I spoke to Mr. Babbs, he was surprised to find that you were of the opinion that he has actively sought to prevent your iiivolvement. As to Uk matter of whether or not T nm a Joshua consultant or a District consultant, I must say I find this rather confusing. In one sense it bespeaks an adversarial process which seems to pit you against the District with me somewhere in the middle. On the other band, it suggests a need for me to decide where my loyalties lie. In either case, the focus appears to be on things other than those that might benefit the children of the District. John, I am in this process because I want to see positive change that will result in greater educarional opportunities for children in this school system. My commitment is to do whatever it might take to realize that goal. If that end result is best achieved by unitary Office Of Desegregation Monitoring FILE COPYai/ ib / zooi 14: 04 501-324-2281 Apr IG 01 10:18a RITR ROBERTS LRSD SRO 62B-793-7G54 PAGE 03 P-3 status, so be it. However, if the opposite is true, I will support non-unitary status with a vengeance. You see, for me, this effort has never been about integration per sc. Integration in the absence of changed mind sets about the worth and value of children of color is an unworthy goal Obviously, there remains much to be done io this arena. Thats why I say, possibly, the District is ready for unitary status. In any case, we will talk further. Sincerely, A Terrence J. Rober^ PhJ), Cc: Mi. Junious Babbs, Ms. Ann Brown Received John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JUL 2 - 200J Off ICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Via Facsimile - 376-2147 June 29, 2001 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd^wbeU.net Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Chris: Please provide all the information that has been provided to you by District officials at any time since June 10, 1999. Our tentative list of witnesses includes your senior administrators, beginning with Dr. Carnine and going to the level of Director. I am unable to give specific names because your letter of June 29, 2001 does not give specific names of the people responsible for [the] specific section of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. These are the names that I think are responsible: Dr. Les Carnine, Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Dr. Kathy Lease\nDr. Marion Lacey\nDr. Linda Watson\nDr. Richard Hurley\nDr. Ed Williams\nDr. Don Stewart\nDr. Gary Smith\nMs. Sadie Mitchell\nMr. Junious Babbs\nMs. Jo Evelyn Elston\nMr. Brady Gadberry\nMr. James Washington\nMr. Robert Robinson\nMs. Pat Price\nMr. Leon Adams\nMs. Vanessa Cleaver\nMr. Dennis Glasgow\nMs. Frances Jones: Ms. Kay Rainey\nMr. Michael Oliver\nMr. Everett Hawks\nMr. Larry Mitchell\nMs. Gayle Bradford\nMr. Lionel Ward\nMr. William Broadnax\nMr. Ray Gillespie\nMs. Levanna Wilson\nMr. Gene Parker\nMr. Michael Oliver\nMr. Larry Mitchell\nand Mr. Jim Mobsy. Other tentative witnesses include: Dr. Terrence Roberts\nDr. Steven Ross, Dr. John Fluker\nDr. Ray Simon, Dr. Charity Smith\nDr. Ken James\nand Mr. Willie Morris. I will supplement this list on Monday after receipt of all the requested information. With respect to exhibits, I intend to use some of the documents that you submit to me by the end of the day, the ODM reports, and the FOIA responses that you have received copies of as you requested those copies from the school staff. I also may find it necessary to use correspondence between us and yourself, Dr. Carnine and staff members of the Little Rock School District. I also expect that we may make reference to information provided to the District from Drs. Steven Ross and Terrence Roberts, as well as the ADE. We have asked Dr. John Fluker to look at some of your statistical data and are not certain what he has done with it at this time. I will share any reports from him as soon as I receive them. Finally, I expect to use the Monitor and Associate Monitors of the ODM as witnesses as well. Siiicerely, / ^hn W. Walker JWW:js cc: Ms. Ann Brown Counsel of Record 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 UI. 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. 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. SHAFER. P.A WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN UI. P.A. MICHAEL 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 237 EAST MILLSAP. SUITE 7 FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72703 TELEPHONE 501-695-2011 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 TAMARA G. MARTIN RYAN A. BOWMAN TIMOTHY C. EZELL T. MICHELLE ATOR KAREN S. HALBERT SARAH M. COTTON OFCOUNSEL 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 June 29, 2001 JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-3323 FAX 501-244-5341 fendleyOfec.net Via Hand Delivery RECEIVED The Honorable Susan Webber Wright 522 U.S. Post Office and Courthouse JUN 2 9 2001 600 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3325 OFRCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITIM RE: Little Rock School District v. PCSSD Dear Judge Wright: Enclosed please find two documents which the Little Rock School District may introduce as exhibits in the hearings beginning July 5, 2001, pertaining to Little Rock School Districts compliance with its revised desegregation and education plan. Little Rock School District will also rely on its interim Compliance Report filed March 15,2000, and its Compliance Report filed March 15,2001, which have already been filed with the Court. We thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Respectfully, JCF/jm Enclosures John C. Fendley, Jr. cc via hand delivery: Mr. John Walker Ms. Ann Marshall The Honorable Susan Webber Wright June 29, 2001 Page 2 cc via U.S. mail: Mr. Sam Jones Mr. Steve Jones Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Sammye TaylorLittle Rock School District Pupil Services Department Scholarship Awards 2000-2001 School Year School # Scholar^ip Recipients BM BF WM WF OM OF Central 4 4% 11 10% 25 23% 64 4 1 HIS Male 0 HISF Female 1 58% 4% 1% 0 1% Total no BM J.A. Fair 6 22 4 8 0 0 1 1 42 14% 52% 10% 19% 0 0 1% Hall McClellan Parkview TOTALS 15 13 5 5 0 0 1 0 39 38% 8 21% 7 10% 40 13% 33% 26 68% 19 26% 91 30% 13% 0 0 7 10% 41 14% 13% 3 8% 31 42% 111 37% 0 0 0 2 3% 6 2% 0 0 0 4 5% 5 2% 1% 1 0 38 1% 0 3 73 0 3 1% 4% 5 302 2% SCHOLARSHIP AWARD TOTALS 5185,242 $32,600 $406,458 $91,496 $332,781 $1,048,577 BF WM WF HisM HisF OM $309396 $278,606 $284,752 $334,680 $425,881 $1,633,315 $454330 $116,640 $342,450 0 $97,610 $1,010330 $963,662 $40,072 $240,000 $46,316 $647,566 $1337,616 $74,000 0 0 0 $82,192 $156,192 $16,000 0 0 0 $195,662 $211,662 $10,000 $10,000 $60,000 0 0 $80,000 deceived JW 2 9 2001 OF 0 $4,000 0 0 $500 $4300 Total Award By School $2,012330.00 $481,918 $1333,660 $472,492 $1,782,192 $6,082,792.00 ScholarshipAwards.OlHighlights of Grades K-2 Results Developmental Reading Assessment 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 2 9 25\n,I OmCEOF All three grade levels improved in spring 2001. 1999-2000 Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 72.2 53.6 67.5 2000-2001 80 7 63.8 75.4 First grade showed the greatest improvement in spring 2001. Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Change +8.5 +10.2 +7.9 More than 75 percent of the schools improved in spring 2001. Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 # of Schools Improving 27 (77%) 29 (83%) 29 (83%) 1Both area and magnet schools did well. The five highest performing schools at each grade level for each year follow. 1999-2000 2000-2001 Kindergarten McDermott* Fulbright* Rightsell* Terry * Grade 1 Grade 2 Mitchell* Woodruff* Williams Wilson* Western Hills* McDermott* Rightsell* Williams Forest Park* Western Hills* Otter Creek* Denotes area schools. McDermott* Baseline* Fulbright* Gibbs Brady* Williams Carver McDermott* Booker Forest Park* Carver Williams Western Hills* Otter Creek* McDermott* 2Many schools improved dramatically in spring 2001. Schools improving 20 or more points are as follows. All are area schools, and most are high poverty schools. Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 _______2000-01 Baseline (42.9)* Badgett (28.4)* Forest Park (27.1) Cloverdale (26.1)* Stephens (25.3)* Wakefield (44.6)* Watson (41.9)* Baseline (41.2)* Stephens/Garland (27.5)* Western Hills (25.8) Chicot (24.4)* Badgett (20.6)* Dodd (31.1) Badgett (31.1)* Stephens/Gariand (30.1)* Pulaski Heights (29.3) McDermott (22.5) Denotes schools with 75% or higher eligible for free/reduced lunch. 3The Incentive Schools are, in general, improving. With the exception of Mitchell and Rightsell at grade 1, a majority of the students are performing at or above the \"readiness\" level. Kindergarten Franklin Mitchell Rightsell Rockefeller Stephens 1999-2000 64.3 90.6 92.1 75.8 40.8 2000-2001 58.6 92.3 80.5 76.2 66.1 Change -5.7 1.7 -11.6 0.4 25.3 Grade 1 Franklin Mitchell Rightsell Rockefeller Stephens 1999-2000 57.6 25.0 35.7 76.3 23.5 2000-2001 58.9 25.0 41.7 65.2 51.0 Change 1.3 0.0 6.0 -11.1 27.5 Grade 2 Franklin Mitchell Rightsell Rockefeller Stephens 1999-2000 81.2 48.6 94.7 71.4 31.3 2000-2001 83.6 50.0 70.5 84.2 61.4 Change 2.4 1.4 -24.2 12.8 30.1 4The Newcomer Centers are improving, except for Terry at kindergarten and grade 2. Kindergarten Brady Chicot Romine Terry Washington 1999-2000 76.9 56.1 66.7 91.9 81.2 2000-2001 93.4 70.9 86.4 86.7 84.1 Change 16.5 14.8 19.7 -5.2 2.9 Grade 1 Brady Chicot Romine Terry Washington 1999-2000 34.9 26.8 59.6 47.1 35.5 2000-2001 53.5 51.2 76.5 59.8 41.1 Change 18.6 24.4 16.9 12.7 5.6 Grade 2 Brady Chicot Romine Terry Washington 1999-2000 70.8 38.6 68.8 81.2 63.3 2000-2001 79.6 52.1 81.6 67.1 81.4 Change 8.8 13.5 12.8 -14.1 18.1 5There are seventeen (49 percent) elementary schools in the District where 75 percent or more of the students are eligible for free/reduced lunch. Many of these schools improved dramatically in spring 2001 and/or some are performing in the highest range of scores (80 percent or higher). Kindergarten Badgett (94%)____ Franklin (90%) Stephens (90%) Chicot (87%) Baseline (86%) Woodruff (86%) Cloverdale (85%) Wilson (85%) Mabelvale (85%) Mitchell (84%) Watson (83%) Geyer Springs (83%)____________ Rightsell (82%) Meadowcliff (81%) Wakefield (80%) Fair Park (78%) 1999-2000 21.6 64.3 40.8 56.1 51.1 69.2 56.4 66.7 61.0 90.6 56.4 85.1 2000-2001 50.0 58.6 66.1 70.9 94.0 46.2 82.5 80.0 73.3 92.3 73.7 87.7 Change 28.4 -5.7 25.3 14.8 42.9 -23.0 26.1 13.3 12.3 1.7 17.3 2.6 92.1 77.4 46.8 68.3 80.5 77.1 61.1 75.6 -11.6 -0.3 14.3 7.3 6Badgett (94%) Franklin (90%) Stephens (90%) Chicot (87%) Baseline (86%) Woodruff (86%) Cloverdale (85%) Wilson (85%) Mabelvale (85%) Mitchell (84%) Watson (83%)_____ Geyer Springs (83%)____________ Rightsell (82%) Meadowcliff (81%) Wakefield (80%) Fair Park (78%) Grade 1 1999-2000 5.9 57.6 23.5 26.8 29.6 84.2 28.4 82.9 50.8 25.0 24.7 46.8 2000-2001 26.5 58.9 51.0 51.2 70.8 61.5 33.9 53.8 60.5 25.0 66.6 38.6 Change 20.6 1.3 27.5 24.4 41.2 -22.7 5.5 -29.1 9.7 0.0 41.9 -8.2 35.7 70.0 22.0 62.5 41.7 66.6 66.6 72.7 6.0 -3.4 44.6 10.2 7Badgett (94%)____ Franklin (90%) Stephens (90%) Chicot (87%)_____ Baseline (86%) Woodruff (86%) Cloverdale (85%) Wilson (85%) Mabelvale (85%) Mitchell (84%) Watson (83%)_____ Geyer Springs (83%)____________ Rightsell (82%) Meadowcliff (81%) Wakefield (80%) Fair Park (78%) Grade 2 1999-2000 11.8 81.2 31.3 38.6 47.1 78.3 57.9 60.4 43.4 48.6 54.4 72.5 2000-2001 42.9 83.6 61.4 52.1 60.5 86.5 45.1 61.4 63.0 50.0 51.2 66.0 Change 31.1 2.4 30.1 13.5 13.4 8.2 -12.8 1.0 19.6 1.4 -3.2 -6.5 94.7 57.9 40.0 62.9 70.5 75.0 54.4 67.7 -24.2 17.1 14.4 4.8 8Most of the Success for All (SFA) schools improved in spring 2001. Most are now enriching the SFA program with ELLA strategies. Kindergarten Brady Baseline Cloverdale Fair Park Meadowcliff Romine Woodruff 1999-2000 76.9 51.1 56.4 68.3 77.4 66.7 69.2 2000-2001 93.4 94.0 82.5 75.6 77.1 86.4 46.2 Change 16.5 42.9 26.1 7.3 -0.3 19.7 -23.0 Grade 1 Brady Baseline Cloverdale Fair Park Meadowcliff Romine Woodruff 1999-2000 34.9 29.6 28.4 62.5 70.0 59.6 84.2 2000-2001 53.5 70.8 33.9 72.7 66.6 76.5 61.5 Change 18.6 41.2 5.5 10.2 -3.4 16.9 -22.7 Grade 2 Brady______ Baseline Cloverdale Fair Park Meadowcliff Romine Woodruff 1999-2000 70.8 47.1 57.9 62.9 57.9 68.8 78.3 2p00E20Ql 79.6 60.5 45.1 67.7 75.0 81.6 86.5 Change 8.8 13.4 -12.8 4.8 17.1 12.8 8.2 Schools with the Reading Recovery program in grade 1 are performing well. Grade 1 Booker Chicot* 1999-2000 69.3 26.8 2000-2001 87.4 51.2 Change 18.1 24.4 9Dodd Franklin Fulbright** Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson Otter Creek Pulaski Heights** Williams Wilson* 58.3 57.6 61.0 46.8 65.9 69.1 67.7 50.0 84.1 82.9 *2000-2001 was a training year. Reading Recovery not continued in 2000-2001. Grade 2 1999-2000 73.5 58.9 66.6 38.6 71.4 73.9 69.6 61.7 97.1 53.8 2000-2001 15.2 1.3 5.6 -8.2 5.5 4.8 1.9 11.7 13.0 -29.1 Change Booker Chicot* Dodd Franklin Fulbright** Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson Otter Creek Pulaski Heights** Williams Wilson* 79.8 38.6 51.7 81.2 79.3 72.5 80.5 71.1 87.2 45.2 81.4 52.1 82.8 83.6 88.7 66.0 82.9 85.0 90.5 74.5 1.6 13.5 31.1 2.4 9.4 -6.5 2.4 13.9 3.3 29.3 89.7 60.4 92.6 61.4 2.9 1.0 The number of schools with a majority of students performing below the \"readiness\" level is declining. Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 1999-2000 3 (9%) 13 (37%) 8 (23%) 2000-2001 1 (3%) 6 (17%) 2 (6%) 10The number of schools with at least 80 percent of the students performing at the \"readiness\" level is increasing. Kindergarten Grade 1_____ Grade 2 1999-2000 15 (43%) 5 (14%) 10 (29%) 2000-2001 21 (23%) 5 (14%) 18 (51%) The gap between the lowest and highest performing schools is decreasing. Kindergarte n Grade 1 Grade 2 1999-2000 73.2 2000-2001 48.1 Change 25.1 78.3 82.9 72.1 50.2 6.2 32.7 11Black students are improving at every grade level and at a higher rate than Non-Black students. 1999-2000 Kindergarte n Grade 1____ Grade 2 69.3 48.3 63.8 2000-2001 77.0 57.4 69.8 Change 7.7 9.1 6.0 Non-Black students are improving at every grade level. Kindergarte n Grade 1 Grade 2 1999-2000 84.7 71.2 81.6 2000-2001 88.8 77.3 86.8 Change 4.1 6.1 5.2 The achievement gap is much lower in grades K-3 now than in higher grade levels and is decreasing. It is lowest at kindergarten. Kindergarte n Grade 1 Grade 2 1999-2000 15.4 2000-2001 11.8 Change -3.6 22.9 17.8 19.9 17.0 -3.0 -0.8 12John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 RECEIVED JUN 2 9 2001 ^Of JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, P.A. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd^wbell.net Via Facsimile June 28, 2001 Honorable Judge Susan Webber Wright Chief Judge - United States District Court 600 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: LRSD v. PCSSD, et al., Case No. 4:CV82-866 Dear Judge Wright: I am writing this letter to request that you schedule an informal conference between the Little Rock School District counsel and us regarding the forthcoming hearing. The timing of the hearing appears to be insufficient for us to prepare to make our case. The District officials simply have not cooperated with us in providing information on a voluntary basis. We are now met with the inability to communicate with any District official without going through counsel and we are experiencing other problems as well. This is due to instructions and advice of counsel. Let me cite an example of the problems that we are having. We met with Chris Heller, Clay Fendley and Ms. Marshall on Monday of this week. We were informed that there were large numbers of evaluation reports regarding the many programs that have been undertaken by the District in the past three years and before that are sitting, according to Clay, in Clays office. Those reports have been requested by us many times and we were essentially informed that no such reports existed. We still have not seen the reports. Now Clay and Chris do not make them and other District data available to us as has been the normal expectation and practice. That practice has abated since Joshua filed their objections. The timing problem also involves our inability to meet the courts directive that we provide our exhibits by tomorrow. With the Districts lack of cooperation, without there being formal discovery, and with the obstruction directed by Clay and Chris, we simply need much more time to meet our burden of proof. We request that we be allowed to use the time that you have set for trial in July and August to engage in discovery and that the matter be reset for a period of time thereafter. We also note that the District is in the process of preparing reports that it intends to submit in its portion of the hearing. If they attempt to do this, it will prejudice our presentation.This is so because they were obliged, at the time of their report in March, to have fiilly met their obligations and to have that established by documentation. A conference is sorely and urgently needed so that we can address these and other concerns of the parties. May we meet with you either by telephone, or in person, either later today or tomorrow? Sincerely, John W. Walker JWWjs cc: Mr. Chris Heller Ms. Ann Brown Mr. Richard Roachell Counsel of Record C  Cu/ RECEIVED JUL 2 - 7001 received JU12-2O(I1 OmCEOF desegregation MONITORING OmCEOF OESEgfGKnONIMHgm OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF ARKANSAS Mark Pryor Attorney General Samrayc L. Taylor Chief Barrister Direct dial: (501)682-1320 E-mail: sammvet@aq.state.ar.us KL4 FACSIMILE Honorable Susan Webber Wright 302 U.S Post Office and Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 604-5169 Re: LRSD V. PCSSD\nUSDC\n4:82CV866SWW Dear Judge Wright: Mark and I would like to thank you for excusing us from the hearing currently being scheduled by the court for the morning of June 29, 2001. I was not scheduled to be in the office tomorrow and Mark has a deposition scheduled to begin at 10:00 a.m. If we were to attend the hearing, we would object to Mr. Walkers untimely request to continue the hearing dates in July and August, as these dates have been set by court order since April 4, 2001. Again, we appreciate your granting us leave to not attend the June 29 hearing. Respectfully yours, Chief Barrister SLT/alh cc: Counsel of Record via Regular Mail 323 Center Street  Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-8084 Internet Website  http://www.ag.state.ar.us/ Q:\\Civil\\Sammye Taylor\\Deseg\\Judge 6-28-01 .doc 954 Peaces ju. 03 01 18:29 JOHN W. walker SHAWN CHILDS John W. Walker, P.a. AitorneyAt Law 1723 Broadway Lmts Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 Via Facsimile - 376-2147 July 3. 2001 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENKYEa. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Hbjdsrson Boao Email: nwhcnrydgawbelhaet Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Chris\nJoshua may use the following documents as exhibits during the hearings on July 5** and 6*: 1) Compliance Plan dated June 10, 1999 and any subsequent plans I D n________ J - 1 _______________ *  * -2) LRSD Interim Report dated March 15. 2000\n-3) LRSD Compliance Report dated March 15, 2001\nODM Report dated June 21, 1995\n^5) ODM Repon dated October 26, 1999\n*^5) ODM Repon dated March 29, 2000\n^7) ODM Repon dated April 11, 2001\nt-^) ODM Repon dated August 11, 1999\n9) Draft Ev^uations from PRE\n10) Responses to request for information dated 6-8-01 to Mr. Babbs\n11) Responses to request for information dated 6-13-01 to Dr, Lesley 12) Documents listed in Dr, Lesleys letters dated 6-14-01 and 6-27-01 to Ms, Springer\n13) Responses to request for information dated 6-20-01 to Ms, Mitchell\n14) Responses to request for information dated 6-27-01\n15) Responses to request for information dated 6-28-01 to Mr. Heller 16) Loan requests to State of Arkansas from LRSD\n17) Responses to requests for information dated 6-27-01 to Ms, Mitchell\n18) Responses to requests for information dated 7-2-01 to Dr, James\n19) LRSD 2000-01 Recruitment and Placement Service Annual Report 20) Dept, Of Exceptional Children Strategic Plans - 1998 and 2001 21) Budget and Enrollment data for LRSD elementary schools\n22) Manpower Reports for 1998-99 through 2000-01, 23) Standardized test results (SAT, ACT, Stanford) from 1982 to present 24) Leners dated April 14, 1999, April 20, 1999, May 12, 1999 to Dr. Carnine5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 954 803/03 JUL 03 01 18:29 ----- 25) Letters dated July 8, 1999 and October to John Walker\n18, 2000 from Christopher Heller - 26) Letter dated September 13, 1999 to Mr. Larry Berkeley\nLumpkin to Junious Babbs- ^'garding equitable allocation 1-29) Settlement Agreement dated 1989 pages 15-16\n26-27\nof resources\nAgreement between State and LRSD dated 3-19-2001 321 Walker d^ed 5-11-13-99- Correspondence between Mr. Babbs and Drs. Ross and Roberts- 341 from Mr. Babbs office on 7-2-01- and -34) Dr. Camine s Pnonty Repons.   There are several requests that are still outstanding and documents as exhibitc Tf  ana we may use some of those all documents that are given to tbs XVwkh \"structed District personnel to share you. Your cooperation is appreciated. Sincerely, John W. Walker JWWjs cc: Ms. Ann Marshall5013744187 UfiLKER LfiW FIRM 954 P01Z03 JUL 03 01 18:29 W. WALKER, P.A. Anorney at Law 5723 Broadway Tittle Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 Fax (501) 374-4187 FAX transmission COVER SHEET Date: To: Fax: [. [, r 'Ll3-^0! J ] Re: L Sender: YOU SHOULD RECEIVE S J ] - ---------(including cover sheet)]PAGE(S), INCLUDING THIS COVERSHEET. TF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THEPAGES PLEASECALL \"\u0026lt;(501) 374-575S\u0026gt; . only for th use of the individiiBi or andconfideatial infonnationintentted ___ I entit-y- -n--a-m---e-d-- -a--b- ove. I*f t*he rea*der of' th-is mIessSage is HnOoTt tmhee iinmteenaodeedd J Wsibie to deUver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissenunation, distribution or copying of this communication is strirrlv i_____ received this communication in error, please immediate notify or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have to us at the above address via the U.S. Postal Service. Thank us by telephone, and return the original message :you. a 1015744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 932 P02/03 JUL 03 01 06:50 JOHN w. walker SHAWN CHILDS John w. Walker, p.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway LmtE Rock, Arkansas 72206 TELEraoNE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 Via Facsimile July 3, 2001 O' COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY. Ra pONNALMcHENW 8210 Hknoceson Road Ti. . Liras Rock AaxANBAs 72210 Phons: (501) 87^3426  Faz (501) 372-3428 Email\nmcbeniydaswbellnat Honorable Judge Susan Webber Wright Chief Judge - United States District Court 600 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 7220] Re: LRSD v. PCSSD, et al. - Case No, 4\nCV82-866 Dear Judge Wright\nnought to meet with Little Rock school officials since our  * Honor on Friday. After providing names of possible witnesses to Mr Heller nn R a u------- to them available on Monday. On yesterday 1 snnke m u n  Fnday, he agre the inteiviews and he indicated that he would ge?btk wth^me At Wn m that we will be unable to make thL Since our conference 5vith Her on Friday, agreed interviews this week, we will be unable to make them available for requesting a conference with the Court to assist us with an amicable resolution of this matter. ificerely, ictated but not read John W. Walker JWW:js cc\nMr Chris Heller Ms. Ann Brown Qffioeof OMsgregation MonRoring FILE COPYrxioAYdni.)^) H. lUTTOW. px. ,nm K. nioua. j., r.. ^AavmT.fA  uluny. C Aavtx. JAMtt C. CXaAX. JV F.A, tvomaa  Lcocxrr. zx. iotoi OCWT wanea. 7.A. FAUL X SXMXAM lU. r A. LAArrw auxxAF.A. A **cxurrpiSMr^jx..zA. MMXS C9WMP \"AAAiA. f-A. h FWUJF MaLCAM. F.A JAHJJ M. aWSAN. FJL ZAMttM. UXTAH. F.A. J siienBKo pj, H. MCON.  A. *nXlAMTTMH lAXrn. M AWY s. conm. f.a. UatAAA 0. TAVLOt. 7.A 5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM iKLUAi liWKjbliGt\na CLARK 932 P03/03 JUL 03 '01 0002 06:50 Josmo. WMT. nu. i.a UZAtlTH kOMCN MUAXAt * a CttKTOnrBl Htuat F A. w/MWjunm iomTs.:RAPMu?.A vn.UAH M. oxtmw tn. f a. X noctt. ZA. iNAFCt. MACxrr r.A. OVtNA. fA. TA. A. WAPOBU. JtL. f.A. tCOTT I. a.A M.0AVVlC0V.tY..A. *O*\u0026lt;*T \u0026gt;. aCACM. flL. tjL. J. LZE BXOMr, r,A. jAMsac aAax.JK.. *y A. LWWI. F.A. rT K. rargy j fluy ALWN VAOe. FtlOSCOAMM\u0026amp;Lrx YONlA f. town. \u0026gt;.A. OAvw 0. YOMt. e.A. Friday Eldredge A Clark ATToaxeys t law * JMITSC tlAgiuTY rAfiTNBtSfllf \".friosyflrm.com 2000 AEQlONS CCNTgft 468 WZ6ST CAPITOt. ttls rock. ARKANflAa rzzovjAss TCLfPhone 501-378-4011 Fax 501-378-2,47 EAST utusAp. wire 'Avengviue. awcum \u0026gt;jj I^IEFMONE sei.AM.20lt Fax Ml.sMeMAT zM pipTM sneer eurrneviLtt. AMfA/tStit \u0026gt;ia TBLW\u0026lt;^\u0026lt; 70.m24M FAX x7eeTi.aia VIA FAZ No, 374-4187 July 2,2001 n MOOXX. ClAA F. A MO(Ar ALBteMVtA A trXAM Mtrna * CwJTOMttl tJhVSON. fJL ------------- OAlCAay a. TaVX^ Pji. WRXOX. zx. C meXMAN. r./i, tWOA K fOWiOt^ f,/c UMXX V. AMtTK r.A. msocrrr. oafju, t MtuuiiQmi XAKVatLORLOCM colbmam wunoLoox. m. AUUOKX OOwrVBU. aUXHHdWlK 'ASON 4. WN0A1N IUJC8 *. nowiu. WA.l.XAJlV OLLY ituKnrr Wttxro. woiQu nom TAMAAU MARYW ctaita. wmiAM C O'\" t T. WOBUZ ATOt s. 4AUrr \u0026lt;a\u0026lt;AAM. OITTQa XCAAXC *RiUM u. nouiT \u0026lt;r. LABxeLsix Kfk \u0026amp; COMU. F A. A\u0026gt; MGAtUlTEfc CMMstOPNCA malsx LiTTUenOCX rev Crt\u0026lt;47*tuA FAX CMeaMeMM Mr. John Walker JOHNW\nWALKER,?,A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Re: LRSD V. PCSSD Dear John\nme know the order in which they will testify so that I can mnlfB time. In accordance wrth your letter. Dr. Lesley wiU not be avaailrarbalneg uenmtieln tthse t oA hauveg thuemst pSreJseSnt? at the appropriate You have said fiiat you plan to call Ann Marshall, Gene Jones and Horace Smith fiom Desegregation Monitoring. I have called ODM to attempt as I hear something, I will let you know. to the Of\u0026amp;ce of arrange ameetingin advance of their testimony. As soon We also discussed tfaeavailability of Steve Ross and Terrence Roberts, Itold you that we have not made any arrangements to have them present on Thunday or Friday. Lk Camine is in the process of moving to FayetteviUe. Dick Hurley has not yet remmed firm not yet returned from a trip out the available for interviews\" this week to make them Yoj Christopher J. Heller CJH/dh I 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 July 3, 2001 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, PA DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Henderson Road LnTLE Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone\n(501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd^wbell.net Mr. Ray Simon Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201 RECEIVED JUL 5 - 2001 Dear Mr. Simon: OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Would you please let us have access today to your correspondence files and other files regarding the 20 million dollar loan forgiveness discussions that you have been having with Little Rock. You will recall that we asked to be included in those discussions and have not been. This is to also inform you that we expect to call you as a witness in the existing case. We may not get to you on Thursday or Friday of this week, but if we dont we, please expect to be called on either August I\" or August 2\". With best regards, I remain, Sincerely, John W. Walker JWW:js cc\nMs. Sammye Taylor Ms. Ann Brown Mr. Chris Heller / 5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 260 P02 AUG 15 01 11:22 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: IMH Effective\nJuly 11,2001 CLASS INTERRUPTIONS Purpose The purpose of these regulations is to increase significantly the amount of time on task or engaged learning time without increasing the school day or school year. The organization of the school and the use of time in the allotted school day send a powerful message to teachers and students about the value of learning. Keeping instructional time sacred is respectful of both teaching and learning. Extending engaged learning time\" is a research-based strategy for improving student achievement. I Interruptions to Instruction The principal and the Campus Leadership Team of each school are directed to protect instructional time from interruptions for non-instructiona! matters to every extent possible. Schools should periodically audit the amount of potential engaged time that is being lost due to teacher absences, student absences, tardiness in beginning lessons, time lost due to discipline infractions, time lost due to assemblies or presentations unrelated to the course benchmarks, early releases, field trips not tightly correlated with the course benchmarks, and similar losses. These data collections will enable the school to find ways to increase the amount of instructional time without adding to the school day, week, or year. Some specific guidelines follow: 1. 2. 3. Principals and other office personnel should not use the intercom more than twice per day (once in the morning and once in the afternoon), except when an emergency justifies the interruption of instruction. Students should generally not be allowed to miss core instruction, especially English language arts and mathematics, for field trips, presentations on non-academic topics, health screenings, school pictures, non-academic assemblies, events to reward students, early dismissals for athletic participation, etc. Principals should generally forbid the showing of rented videos to classes, even when they are loosely connected to curriculum topics. Rather, teachers should use video that is tightly correlated to the course benchmarks or use only clips from longer videos to illustrate~a point. Entertainment videos should not be used during core instructional time. 4. Allowing students during the instructional day to play games of any kind that do not have an instructional purpose (i.e., related to the course standards and/or benchmarks) is inappropriate.I [ 5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 260 P03 AUG 15 01 11:23 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE: IMH Effective: July 11,2001 -continued- 5, Schools should not engage in the practice of giving students free time' at the beginning of school year, the day before holidays, days during semester examinations, the last week of school, for \"team\" days, and so forth. 6. Instruction should not be interrupted by pulling students out to take care of library business, to see the nurse, to see the counselor, to take unnecessary phone calls. Rather, the support staff should make arrangements with teachers ahead of time to send students at their convenience. These guidelines are not meant to suggest that classrooms should be devoid of joy. Rather, they are intended to communicate a climate of respect for teaching and learning, to communicate to students a consistent message that their learning is important, and to enable all of the Districts students to be successful learners. Each Campus Leadership Team shall include in its work a review of current practices that interrupt instruction and shall design strategies to eliminate or radically limit the times during any school day when teaching and learning are interrupted for unplanned, non-instructional issues.OlACutl/jy 5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 260 P01 AUG 15 01 11:22 fOHN W. WALKER, P.A. Attorn^ at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 Fax (501) 374-4187 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET To: Date: Tax: Te: Sender: YOU SHOULD receive [ (including cover sheet)] PAGE(S), INCLUDING THIS CO VEE SHEET IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL \"\u0026lt;(501) 374-3758\u0026gt;\" The information contained in this facsimile message is attorney privileged and confidential information intended only for die use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of tliis message is not the intended recipient, or die employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediate notify us by telephone, and return the original message to us at the above address via the U.S. Postal Service. Thank you. Office 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 July 23, 2001 Dr. Ken James Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ken: My associate, Gene Jones, has been closely monitoring the districts program evaluation efforts. Gene has been able to obtain some program evaluations, but he has been unsuccessful in procuring others, so Im asking for your help. While the districts March 2001 Compliance Report reads that PRE has evaluated a number of specific programs (page 148), most of those evaluations were not available when we made our latest request for them on June 26, 2001. Below is a list of the 12 evaluations we need in order to continue our monitoring. All are for 2000-01 unless otherwise indicated. 1. NSF (We received a copy on 6-26-01, but are unsure that its a final version.) 2. Middle schools 3. Extended year schools 4. Summer schools (for 1999-00) 5. HIPPY 6. Charter school 7. Campus Leadership Teams 8. English as a Second Language 9. Lyceum Scholars Program 10. Southwest Middle Schools SEDL program 11. Watson Elementarys Onward to Excellence 12. Collaborative Action Team Please forward these program evaluations to us as soon as possible. If any are still not available, please let us know the status of their preparation and when we may expect to receive them. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sincerely yours. Ann S. MarshallFriday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY {1M2-I994) 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 111. 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 111. 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. 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 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 601-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 237 EAST MILLSAP. SUITE 7 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72703 TELEPHONE 501-695-2011 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 OFCOUNSEL B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. A.D. MCALLISTER RECEIVED 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2898 FAX 870-762-2918 JUL 17 2001 CHRISTOPHER HELLER LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-1506 FAX 501-244-5344 hnrg?c.rot OmCEOF DESEGREGRniianDRm July 16, 2001 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor One Union National Plaza RECEIVED 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 JUL 1 7 ZOOl Re\nLRSD Compliance Report - March 15, 2001 OFFlGfcOl DESEGREGATION MONITORING Dear Ann\nI will attempt to arrange a meeting among the representatives of the parties and the members of your staff in accordance with our conversation last week. In the meantime, I would like to request that you share with the parties any written information developed by your office concerning errors in LRSDs March 2001 Compliance Report. This would make it easier for the parties to prepare for possible meetings with the members of your staff as well as the hearing scheduled in August and November. Thank you for your consideration. very Christopher Heller CJH/bk cc\nMr. John W. Walker Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Samuel Jones Ms. Sammye Taylor Mr. Steve Jones Dr. Ken JamesJohn W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKEK SHAWN CHILDS Via Facsimile - 604-5106 July 23, 2001 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, PA. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Hendekson Road Little Rock, Aekansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mcheiuyd^wbell.net Honorable Judge Susan Webber Wright Chief United States District Judge 600 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 RECESVED JUL 25 2001 Re: Case No. LR-C-82-866 OmCEOF OESEGi\u0026amp;GMlONHQWTOHifjS Dear Judge Wright: This IS to inform you that we have experienced some difSculty in obtaining documents from the Little Rock School District. We informed your office while you were away of one set of problems we were experiencing last week. We are mindful of the courts deadline to provide Mr. Heller and Mr. Pendley with a listing of our exhibits, which is tomorrow. Our FOIA requests were dated June 5, 2001, July 2, 2001 and July 11, 2001 respectively, well in advance of last Friday s deadline and we have not been given the data. As I am writing this letter, Mr. Hellers secretary is on the telephone requesting that we must come to his office, look at and copy whatever is in two boxes. That is entirely unacceptable and fhistrates our ability to be prepared I will ask the secretary to have the boxes delivered to our offices in order to see whether the matenal being provided is what we requested. We will safely keep the boxes and return them to Mr. Heller on tomorrow. The Court is being asked to schedule a conference for identification of documents and document delivery for Wednesday, assuming that we have been unable to get the information that we have requested. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ictated but not read John W. Walker JWW:js cc: Mr. Chris Heller Ms. Ann MarshallOffice 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 July 23, 2001 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Dear Chris: Your letter of July 16, 2001 arrived while I was out of state last week, so please understand my delay in responding to your request for information about errors we identified in the LRSDs March 2001 Compliance Report. Enclosed is a list of the math errors we found in the pages of the Compliance Report. These are solely errors in mathematical calculations, based on figures that the district used in its report. For example, page 13 charts the Masters Degree Plus Nine or More Years of Experience for elementary schools. In the 1999-2000 column, the numbers for Garland are 6/26 24% when 6 is actually 23% of 26. Most of the math errors we found were minor, but some are significant. For example, page 27, last paragraph, 6' line: The report claims that 66% of the districts African-American students participated in a co-curricular activity during the 1999-00 school year. The correct calculation is between 46% and 48%, depending on which enrollment numbers the district used to arrive at 62% as the corresponding proportion of African-Americans who participated in extracurricular activities, which is cited in the paragraph at the top of page 27. We have not catalogued any other errors we may have found in the report, such as a chart that erroneously lists a school as closed in a year when the building was actually open, inconsistencies among charts, or discrepancies between what a chart shows and what the accompanying narrative asserts. Sincerely yours,  Ann S. Marshall Enc. cc: All Counsel of Record Dr. Ken James . ^4 Math Errors Found by ODM in LRSDs March 15, 2001 Compliance Report 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 8. 9. Page 7, bottom chart, 1997, Percent A-A Page 13, bottom chart. Garland, 1999-2000 Page 13, top of page. Rockefeller, 1\" column Page 13, bottom chart, ACC-Metro, 1998-99 Page 17, bottom chart, 1996-97 Page 17, bottom chart, 1998-99 Page 22, middle chart, 1998-99 Percents, White Females Page 22, middle chart, 1998-99 Percents, Other Females Page 22, middle chart, 1999-2000 Percents, Other Females 10. Page 22, middle chart, 2000-01 Percents, White Males 11. Page 24, 1* paragraph, 3\"* line 12. Page 27, last paragraph, 6* line 13. Page 27, last paragraph, b* line 14. Page 40, bottom row, 2000-2001, Other 15. Page 40, bottom row, 2000-2001, Total 16. Page 40, 1 bullet, second line 17. Page 40, 2\"** bullet, last line 18. Page 47, bottom row. Total 19. Page 47, bottom row. Total 20. Page 92, bottom row. Change 21. Page 93, bottom row. Change 22. Page 124, bottom row, 4\"' column 23. Page 127, 2\"* chart, 1999, Total 24. Page 129, 1 chart, 2000, Total 25. Page 129, 1* chart, Increases, Total 26. Page 129, 1* chart, % Change, Total 27. Page 132, 1 chart. All Students, % Change 28. Page 132, 1' chart. A-A Students, % Change 29. Page 145, ALC, 1999-2000, Total 30. Page 145, Totals, 1999-2000, Total 31. Page 146, ALC, 1997-98, D/0 32. Page 146, Total, 1997-98, D/0 33. Page 146, Total, 1999-2000, D/0 34. Page 146, Ft. Hgts., 1997-98 D/0 35. Page 146, Ft. Hgts., 1998-99, D/0 36. Page 146, Mann, 1998-99 D/0 37. Page 146, Pul. Hgt., 1997-98 D/0 38. Page 146, TOTAL, 1997-98 D/0 39. Page 146, TOTAL, 1999-00 Enr 40. Page 146, GRAND TOTAL, 1999-2000 Enr 41. Page 147, 1 paragraph, 4* line 42. Page 161, TOTALS, 1998-99 White 43. Page 161, 1\" paragraph, 4* line 1 /in/ 1*4 0 O-xn/ Z*4 /O 00X1/ Zo /O er\\n/  TZU 9 FL 7% -1% 1 on/ 1V / 0 1 /rn/ 1 0/0 ^on/ J V / o z-z-n/ 00 0 1 gn/ 1 3/0 . 1 gn/ 1 3/0 +5 +5 +22 ono/ oTTO 1 n ACi lo.4o F+tSO 669 1200 22 OTT 1 o 4 1 r\\ 1 n/  IvO 7% J fyv 690 oz~ *400 /in/ *4/0 6% F% 3% 339 67323 12733F YH} 3\n29e-\n46+ eight 15% 23% 26% 58% 8 9 0 0 9% 18% 42% 46% to 48% 19% 18% 18 19 135 81% 18.49 11.81 577 1282 2220 1061 92% -7% -7% 277 795 38% 600 466 5% 4% 0 0 326 5,343 12,351 173 3,290,452 nineArxwwAc -fo e.1- JOHN W. Walker, RA. Attorney Ar Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHENRY, RA. DONNA J. McHENRY 8210 Hendebson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenrydi^wbell.net Via Facsimile: 324-2146 July 24, 2001 Dr. Kenneth James Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 received JUL 2 5 2001 Re: FOIA Office Of OSESKKfflONMONHOfflWe Dear Dr. James: This request is pursuant to the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act. Would you provide for review, inspection, and copying the responses received to the e-mail request dated July 12, 2001 from Dr. Lesley to members of the Cabinet for : the ways that ODM has been involved in our work- committees, reviews of materials, etc. By copy of this letter to Ms. Ann Marshall, we are asking that she allow us to inspect any documents that she has related to this request. We also intend to call Ms. Marshall as a witness on the good faith issue and her knowledge of the Districts implementation activities during the next hearing, if time permits. Please make all of these responses available to me by Friday, July 27, 2001 at 1:00 p. m. Sincerely, W. Walker cc: Ms. Ann Marshall JWW:fcJohn w. Walker, p.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKEE SHAWN CHILDS July 24, 2001 OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHenry pa. DONNA J. McHENEY 8210 Hendeeson Road Little RocxAskansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mcheiiryd@swbell.iiet Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 RECEIVED JUL 2 5 2001 Re: LRSD Compliance Hearings OFHCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Dear Chris\nPlease find enclosed ave been told that they did not exist, we shall ask the court for sanctions that Jumous Babbs lied, i.e., perjured himself many times. It appears that r I hope that this pattern of deception and misrepresentation does not up m your exhibit list after we It is already evident continue. it was with your advice. JWW\njs Enclosure cc: Ms. Ann Marshall All Counsel of Record EXHIBIT LIST -Job description - Associate Superintendent for Desegregation -Job description - Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services -E-mails from J. Babbs desegregation folder provided by Clay Pendley on 7/18/2001 -E-mails to and from Junious Babbs provided by Clay Pendley on 7/18/01 -E-mails to and from Sadie Mitchell provided by Clay Pendley on 7/19/01 -Response from Dr. Bonnie Lesley dated July 20,2001 in response to POIA request dated 7/12/01 for test data and other data regarding Rightsell, Otter Creek, Pulaski Heights and Central -Response from Dr. Bonme Lesley dated 7/20/2001 in response to POLA request dated 7/12/01 for written instructions regarding the DRA and validation studies regarding DRA -Letter dated July 18, 2001 from Clay Pendley to Joy Springer regarding requests for information -Response to request dated June 13, 2001 requesting dis-aggregated summer school data for each of the last three years -Letter dated September 5, 2000 to Ray Simon from Brady Gadberry and Juniuos Babbs -Resource C: Standards from Programs Evaluation -Letter dated 6/26/01 from Dr. Bonme Lesley indicating that information regarding summer school should be obtained from School Services - Sadie Mitchells division -Letter dated 7/13/01 from Sadie Mitchell indicating that information regarding school should be obtained from Instruction - Dr. Bonnie Lesleys division summer -Letter dated November 16,2000 to Dr. Carnine from John Walker regarding Joshuas lack of participation in the development of program, policies and procedures -Memo dated 8/28/01 from Busbea and Preeman re: observation survey and DRA testing -Test results four (4) schools - Rightsell, Otter Creek, Pulaski Heights and Central -formats for reporting test results -Email dated 3/1/2001 from Dr. Lesley to Dr. Carnine-Letter dated 6/26/01 frora Dr. Lesley to Joy Springer -Letter dates 7/13/01 from Sadie Mitchell to Joy Springer -Email dated 8/23/99 from Bonnie Lesley to Associate Supts -Email dated 1/10/2000 re: Public Information Folder on compliance -Email dated 10/16/2000 from Babbs to Dr. Camine -Email dated 10/19/2000 from Dr. Lease to Babbs \u0026amp; Dr. Camine -Email dated 10/24/2000 from Dr. Ross to J. Babbs -Email dated 11/3/2000 from Babbs to Dr. Ross -Email dated 11/9/2000 from Babbs to Dr. Lesley -Email dated 11/19/200 and 11/18/2000 from Babbs to Dr. Lesley -Email dated 11/30/2000 from Dr. Camine to Babbs -Email dated 1/3/2001 from Lease to Camine -Email dated 1/11/2001 from Babbs to Lesley -Email dated 7/12/2001 from Lesley to Cabinet -Email dated 3/14/2001 from Babbs to Camine -Revised Desegregation Education Plan/Compliance Checklist -West Little Rock School -Letter dated 10/7/99 from Babbs to Compliance committee -Memo dated 4/20/99 from Babbs to Board -Parent Survey Results 1999-2000 -Letter dated 8/16/99 to Dr. Camine and othersE-mail dated 8/24/99 from Dr. Lesley to Compliance Committee members Arkansas Department of Education File regarding loan forgiveness Exhibits included by Little Rock School District on their exhibit listJOSHUA WITNESS LIST AUGUST 1-2, 2001 1. Dr. Leslie Camine 2. Sadie Mitchell 3. Dr. Bonnie Lesley 4. James Washington 5. Dr. Linda Watson Joshua also reserves the right to call the witnesses listed by Little Rock School District4 Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1932-1994) 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 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. SHEPHERD RUSSELL ID. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P A. BARRY E. COPLIN. F.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 5. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN HI. P.A. MICHAEL 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. F.A. JAMES C BAKER. JR.. P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP www.fridayfirm.corn 2000 REGIONS CENTER 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX 501-376-2147 HARRY 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. 237 EAST MILLSAP. SUITE 7 FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72703 TELEPHONE 501-695-2011 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 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 orCOUKSEL B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. AD. MCALLISTER 208 NORTH FIFTH STREET BLYTHEVILLE. ARKANSAS 72315 TELEPHONE 870-762-2698 FAX 870-762-2918 JOHN C. FENDLEY, JR. LITTLE ROCK TEL 501-370-3323 FAX 501-244-5341 fndl*yQfc.ntt Via Hand Delivery Mr. John W. Walker Attorney at Law 1723 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 RE: LRSD V. PCSSD Dear Mr. Walker: July 24, 2001 RECEIVED JUL 2 5 2001 OmCEGF DESffiRESAnOHMGWnDfWS Enclosed please LRSDs Witness and Exhibit Lists for the August 1-2,2001, hearing. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, John C. Pendley, Jr. JCF/jm Enclosurescc w/enc.\nMs. Ann Marshall Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Samuel Jones Ms. Sammye Taylor Mr. Steve Jones Dr. Ken JamesLRSD WITNESS LIST FOR AUGUST 1-2, 2001 1. Dr. Bonnie Lesley 2. Sadie Mitchell 3. Dr. Leslie V. Camine 4. Dr. Linda Watson 5. James Washington 6. Jo Evelyn Elston LRSD would also reserve the right to call any witness listed by Joshua and to call witnesses solely for the purpose of rebuttal. H EB BQ LRSD EXHIBIT LIST FOR AUGUST 1-2,2001 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Summary of Assessment/Evaluation Activities by LRSD Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals, Oct. 20, 1998, providing information on Smart Start training on standards, assessments, and accountability Copy of handout from ADEs training for educators on Smart Start: Higher Student Achievement through Standards and Performance Assessment, fall 1998 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 Invitation to meeting on Systemic Planning Session for Assessment and Program Evaluation, May 18, 1999 Agenda for Assessment and Program Evaluation Work Session, May 18, 1999 Portfolio of Services of Division of Instruction, 1999-2000 Agenda for Division of Instruction, June 17, 1999 meeting\npresentation on the LRSD Assessment Plan Memorandum in July 28, 1999, Learning Links with attached article on Changing the Entitlement Culture -emphasis on results rather than process. 10. LRSD Assessment Plan\nUsing Assessment to Enhance Student Achievement (PowerPoint presentation slides)presented to Board of Education in August 1999 11. 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 12. Transparencies used in July 19, 2000, Curriculum Day for principals, assistant principals, and brokers. 13. Notebook/handouts for July 19, 2000, Curriculum Dayfocus on quality management, data-driven decisions, and LRSD assessment programs 14. Memorandum in August 23, 2000, Learning Links with attached Primer on Assessment Literacy for distribution to Campus Leadership Teams 15. District Assessments: The Assessment Program for 2000-01 116. 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 17. Memorandum to elementary school principals, Dec. 14, 1998, on procedures for upcoming administration of the criterion-referenced tests in reading and mathematics 18. Memorandum to elementary and junior high principals, Jan. 5, 1999, on the testing procedures for grades 4 and 8 ACTAAP Benchmark examinations 19. 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 20. Memorandum to selected administrators on Data Quality with attached paper written by Dr. Glynn Ligon 21. Memorandum to elementary principals, Aug. 17, 1999, relating to use of released items from Smart Start assessments 22. E-mail to curriculum staff, Aug. 23, 1999, relating to use of released items from Smart Start assessments 23. 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. 24. Memorandum in Sept. 22, 1999, Learning Links to principals identifying training needs to administer the Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment 25. 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 26. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley on Mar. 17, 2000, suggesting a resource on how to assess technology knowledge 27. 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. 28. 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 229. Document entitled Procedures for Providing Data Analysis/Interpretation to Decision Makers prepared in April 2000 in response to a request from the National Science Foundationrelating to the assessment of mathematics and science 30. 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. 31. E-mail to Kathy Lease, May 23, 2000, providing feedback to proposed survey of middle school students and teachers. 32. E-mail to principals, Aug. 25, 2000, providing information on upcoming administration of the Achievement Level Tests in September. 33. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 31, 2000, providing information on new middle school report card 34. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 31, 2000, providing copy of new middle school report card report 35. Memorandum from Linda Austin to Marian Lacey providing Middle School Report Card Update 36. E-mail to middle school principals, Jan. 3, 2000, setting up training for teachers on how to administer the State Benchmark examinations 37. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Feb. 1, 2000, setting agenda for Feb. 2 meeting, includes information on the District Assessment Plan 38. E-mail to elementary principals, Feb. 1, 2000, providing information on the use of calculators on Benchmark examinations 39. E-mail to principals, Feb. 3, 2000, providing copy of assessment schedule/matrix to distribute to teachers 40. Document prepared in fall 1999 by PRE on Achievement Level Tests: Assessments that Make a Difference 41. Memorandum to all principals and test coordinators, Mar. 17, 2000, establishing training sessions for the administration of the Benchmark and end-of-course examinations 42, 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 343. E-mail to Kathy Lease and Les Carnine, Apr. 7, 2000, providing rationale for adding science assessments to the Achievement Level Tests 44. 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 45. Memorandum in Aug. 30, 2000, Learning Links to all principals and test coordinators establishing inservice schedule for administration of the SAT9 and ALTs 46. Memorandum in Sept. 8, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals relating to K- 2 assessment and the importance of the language arts instructional block 47. 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 48. Memorandum in Sept. 26, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals relating to instructions to complete the Observation Survey and Developmental Reading Assessment 49. Memorandum to principals, Oct. 13, 2000, requesting feedback through a survey for consideration by the Assessment Focus Group\ncopy of survey attached 50. Memorandum to principals, Feb. 13, 2001, with information on the administration of the climate surveys for parents, teachers, students, and administrators 51. E-mail, Feb. 26, 2001, relating to administration of surveys for the Extended Year Education school evaluation 52. E-mail to curriculum directors, Feb. 27, 2001, relating to discussion of the potential purchase of an electronic curriculum/assessment management system 53. E-mail to principals and selected others on Mar. 1, 2001, relating to an information session on ALT online testing 54. E-mail to principals. Mar. 1, 2001, providing spring testing schedule for elementary, middle, and high schools 55. E-mail to Les Carnine, Mar. 8, 2001, providing outline of PRE responsibilities for Dr. James, incoming superintendent 56. Memorandum to elementary principals. Mar. 14, 2001, providing information on end- of-module mathematics criterion-referenced tests 457. E-mail between various staff. Mar. 14-15, 2001, relating to analysis of results of mathematics and science criterion-referenced tests 58. Document entitled Mathematics, Reading, and Language Achievement Tests\nAdministration Guide prepared by PRE for use in training sessions for the ALTs, 2000-01 59. Memorandum to elementary principals and teachers in Feb. 3, 1999, Learning Links. attaching the results for the second quarter reading and mathematics CRTs 60. 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 61. E-mail to Cabinet, Sept. 28, 1999, providing preview of grade 8 Benchmark examination results 62. E-mail to middle school principals, Oct. 8, 1999, relating to dissemination of Benchmark results 63. E-mail between Lucy Neal and Kathy Lease, Oct. 28-Nov. 2, 1999, relating to need for SAT9 scores to evaluate Title VI 64. Memorandum to Judy Milam, Nov. 4, 1999, requesting report on quarterly SFA assessments 65. Memorandum to Kathy Lease, Nov. 4, 1999, requesting report on DRA results for fall 66. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Dec. 3, 1999, advising her of Dr. Camines request for results of climate surveys 67. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 3, 2000, with report on Advanced Placement scores 68. Memorandum to principals in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links providing information on packets being sent to schools on ALT results 69. E-mail to John Ruflfins and Kathy Lease, Apr. 12, 2000, requesting course enrollment data for NSF report 70. Memorandum to principals and teachers in Apr. 26, 2000, Learning Links with comparisons of second quarter CRT results for 1998-99 and 1999-2000 71. E-mail to Diane Barksdale, Apr. 19, 2000, providing feedback on ALT scores 72. Memorandum to all principals in May 10, 2000, Learning Links providing information about a data interpretation workshop to be conducted by NWEA staff 573. 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 74. 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 75. E-mail to Dennis Glasgow and Ed Williams, May 15, 2000, requesting a special report on the middle school ALT mathematics scores 76. E-mail to SFA principals. May 23, 2000, relating to training for SFA schools for improved academic achievement 77. E-mail to Virginia Johnson, May 19-23, 2000, relating to data collections for NSF evaluations and results of middle school student survey 78. E-mail to elementary principals, June 1, 2000, relating to results of 1999-2000 Developmental Reading Assessment 79. E-mail to Kathy Lease, June 7, 2000, requesting report on Science ALTs 80. E-mail to Virginia Johnson and Ed Williams, June 7, 2000, relating to data requests from Dr. Gamine 81. E-mail to Kathy Lease, June 7, 2000, requesting results of middle school student survey 82. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 23, 2000, requesting interpretation of DRA results 83. E-mail to Les Gamine, July 7, 2000, providing information on interpretation of DRA results 84. 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 85. E-mail to Sadie Mitchell and Frances Cawthon Jones, July 14, 2000, relating to DRA interpretations 86. E-mail to Pat Busbea, Patricia Price, and Ed Williams, July 14, 2000, relating to interpretation of DRA results\nattached document defines proficient 87. E-mail to Patricia Price and Pat Busbea, July 17, 2000, requesting correlation of teacher participation in ELLA training and student achievement 688. E-mail to elementary staff, July 21, 2000, attaching copy of presentation slides to the Campus Leadership Institute on DRA results 89. E-mail to Leon Adams, July 28, 2000, providing rationale from Mitchell Academy for the abandonment of Success for All, based on data analysis 90. 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 91. 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 92. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Sept. 14, 2000, from Linda Austin requesting copy of LRSD Assessment Notebook 93. Memorandum to curriculum division, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmark examinations 94. Memorandum to Board of Directors, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmarks 95. Memorandum to Cabinet, Oct. 25, 2000, announcing available reports on grades 4 and 8 Benchmarks 96. Memoranda to selected principals, Nov. 3, 2000, congratulating them for achievement on grade 4 Benchmarks 97. E-mail to Kathy Lease, Nov. 6, 2000, requesting several sets of data to include in Compliance Report 98. E-mail to Patricia Price and Dennis Glasgow, Nov. 8, 2000, attaching spreadsheets on Benchmark data by SES status 99. E-mail to Kathy Lease from Tara Adams, Jan. 17, 2001, requesting information on interpretation of the ALT results 100. 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. 101. E-mail to principals. May 30, 2000, with attached sample letter to parents that can accompany the ALT results 7102. Document entitled Identified Issues from Data/Attendance Focus Group prepared by PRE 103. Group Document entitled Assessment Window prepared with advice from Focus 104. Document entitled Assessment Advisory Committee, 2000-01 with names of advisory committee members 105. 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-9 106. E-mail to Steve Ross, Nov. 20, 2000, including feedback to a draft plan he had written relating to Ioan forgiveness 107. E-mail to principals and Cabinet, Nov. 29, 2000, with information on how to access test data on the ADE web page 108. Memorandum to IRC Staff, Dec. 1, 2000, relating to available SAT9 and Benchmark reports 109. Memorandum to middle school principals, Dec. 11, 2000, attaching reports on assignments of eighth graders to high schools 110. E-mail to SFA principals and facilitators, Feb. 23, 2001, announcing training on the SFA Student Data Base 111. E-mail to Virginia Johnson, Mar. 14, 2001, relating to analysis of end-of-module test results 112. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 23, 2001, with attached information on the Duke Talent Search 113. 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 114. E-mail to principals, June 29, 2001, attaching copies of DRA test results 115. Memorandum to Division of Instruction staff and others, Nov. 15, 1999, providing information on new requirements from the state on a personalized education plan, appointing a committee to develop a plan, and stating the committee charge 116. Memorandum to Board of Education, Aug. 24, 2000, requesting approval of the attached administrative regulations (IHBDA-R2) and review of other information 8117. E-mail to Dennis Glasgow, Patricia Price, and Suzi Davis, Sept. 15, 2000, requesting that they develop sample SAIPs for the teachers to use 118. Memorandum in Sept. 20, 2000, Learning Links to all principals from Bonnie Lesley stating a philosophy relating to the SAIPs 119. Memorandum in Sept. 20, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals from Patricia Price clarifying the use of data in SAIPs and attaching sample SAIPs 120. Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to all middle school principals from Suzi Davis providing information on SAIPs and attaching sample SAIPs 121. Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to all middle school principals from Suzi Davis on how to use the SAtP form for parent conferencing 122. Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to middle school principals on how to use the SAIP form for middle school mathematics, how to use the ALT data to interpret need, and including a sample SAIP 123. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 21, 2000, from Lillie Carter expressing appreciation for the copy of the SALP philosophy and the sample SAIPs 124. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 27, 2000, from Eleanor Cox expressing appreciation for the SAIP philosophy and for the sample SAIPs 125. E-mail to middle school principals, Sept. 29, 2000, from Suzi Davis providing more assistance with SAIPs 126. Memorandum to Pat Price, Pat Busbea, and Ed Williams, Apr. 3, 2001, with attached document from Connecticut on interpretation of the DRA and use of that data with SAIPs 127. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Dec. 3, 1998, with agenda for Dec. 9 meeting\nincludes reports on District-Level Curriculum Maps 128. Memorandum to Mona Briggs, July 16, 1999, with copy of a training notebook on curriculum mapping and with charge to put together a training program on curriculum mapping 129. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Aug. 30, 1999, with agenda for Sept. 1 meeting\nincludes discussion led by Mona Briggs and Eddie McCoy on Curriculum Mapping Project 130. Memorandum in Nov. 9, 1999, Learning Links providing information on curriculum mapping with attached article 9131. Memorandum in Nov. 17, 1999, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping training 132. Memorandum in Dec. 1, 1999, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping 133. Memorandum in Jan. 12, 2000, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping 134. E-mail to Mona Briggs, Eddie McCoy, and Kathy Lease, Jan. 18, 2000, requesting that they develop a plan for April inservice on curriculum mapping 135. Memorandum in Jan. 19, 2000, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping 136. Memorandum in Feb. 16, 2000, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping 137. E-mail, Feb. 15-17, 2000, relating to training for curriculum mapping trainers 138. Memorandum in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links to Brokers and IRC Specialists establishing training schedule on cuniculum mapping 139. E-mail to Mona Briggs and Marion Woods, Apr. 14, 2000, relating to additional curriculum mapping training 140. E-mail, Apr. 26~May 2, 2000, relating to plans for curriculum mapping 141. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 6, 2000, with information on curriculum mapping 142. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 6, 2000, relating to results of curriculum mapping training 143. Memorandum to designated principals from Mona Briggs, Aug. 23, 1999, providing information on standards for accreditation from ADE 144. Memorandum to elementary staff, Jan. 20, 1999, relating to an ADE evaluation of Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) 145. 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 146. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Feb. 1, 2000, with agenda relating to program implementation 10147. E-mail to Virginia Johnson and Debbie Milam, Feb. 4, 2000, suggesting a model for the evaluation of ViPS programs 148. Memorandum in March 15, 2000, Learning Link relating to progress made by schools implementing the ALT assessment program 149. Document from Kathy Leasecalendar of meetings with Dr. Steve Ross since March 15, 2000\nattached planning document on program evaluation 150. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Mar. 24, 2000, providing information about a meeting with Dr. Steve Ross to discuss the middle school evaluation 151. E-mail to Kathy Lease, May 23, 2000, providing feedback on proposed middle school student survey 152. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Marian Lacey, and Sadie Mitchell, June 12, 2000, from Les Camine requesting information about the middle school evaluation 153. E-mail from Steve Ross to Kathy Lease, June 27, 2000, with attached design notes for Title I/Elementary Literacy Program Evaluation 154. E-mail from Kathy Lease to her staff, Aug. 6, 2000, requesting them to place the memorandum and program evaluations on the Board agenda 155. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Camine, Aug. 10, 2000, providing copies of drafts of the ESL and middle school evaluations, then his questions and her answers. 156. Memorandum to Board of Education, Aug. 24, 2000, from Kathy Lease presenting the program evaluations: Title 1/Elementary Literacy, LRCPMSA (mathematics and science), English as a Second Language, and Middle School Transition and Program Implementation. Attached is her PowerPoint presentation\nProgram Evaluation. 157. E-mail from Steve Ross to Les Camine, Sept. 7, 2000, giving his feedback to the program evaluation reports. 158. E-mail from Debbie Milam to Cabinet members, Sept. 20, 2000, requesting permission to conduct interviews of parents on the subject of parental involvement. 159. E-mail from Kathy Lease to staff, Oct. 11, 2000, advising them of an upcoming meeting with Dr. Steve Ross related to program evaluation 160. 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 11161. 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 162. Document prepared by PRE in November 2000 that lists Additional Programs and Strategies Requesting Evaluation 163. 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 164. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to Virginia Johnson, Jan. 2, 2001, setting up a meeting to finalize CPMSA program evaluation plan 165. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, Jan. 3, 2001, attaching her tentative plan 166. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Carnine and Junious Babbs, Jan. 5, 2001, providing information relating to outsourcing program evaluations to Dr. John Nunnery 167. E-mail from/to Virginia Johnson, Jan. 5-20, 2000, relating to submission of Core Data Elements to the National Science Foundation 168. E-mail from/to Virginia Johnson, Apr. 14-16, 2000, relating to CPMSA program evaluation issues 169. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Les Carnine, Jan. 22, 2001, attaching a draft of the work from Dr. John Nunnery 170. Memorandum (one of several) from Kathy Lease, Jan. 24, 2001, inviting participants to the first meeting of the Research Committee 171. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to John Walker, Jan. 24, 2001, inviting him to participate in first meeting of Research Committee 172. Agenda for Feb. 5, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 173. 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 174. Memorandum from Kathy Lease to Research Committee setting up Feb. 26, 2001, meeting 175. Agenda for Feb. 26, 2001, Research Committee meeting and sign-in sheet 12176. 2001 Invoice from Dr. John Nunnery to LRSD for services rendered, February-March 177. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA staff, Feb. 21, 2001, setting up a meeting to discuss the CPMSA program evaluation 178. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, March 14, 2001, providing updates 179. 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 180. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to CPMSA staff. Mar. 19, 2001, setting up follow-up meeting to discuss CPMSA program evaluation 181. Memorandum to Carnegie Management Team, March 20, 2001, from Bonnie Lesley with information about counseling program and need for a program evaluation 182. 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 183. Sign-in sheet for Apr. 23, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee 184. 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 185. E-mail from Virginia Johnson to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 18, 2001, relating to next steps in providing information about SAT9 item analyses for teachers 186. E-mail from Mona Briggs to Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 25,2001, relating to survey needs for national evaluation of Safe Schools/ Healthy Students project 187. 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 188. E-mail among team working on CPMSA program evaluation, Apr. 18-May 2, 2001, relating to model for program evaluation and data analysis 189. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee, May 2, 2001, with attached latest version of the Guidelines for Program Evaluations 190. Agenda for May 7, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 13191. 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 192. E-mail from Kathy Lease to Research Committee with attached memorandum relating to ne?d meeting on June 11, 2001 193. Agenda for June 11, 2001, meeting of the Research Committee and sign-in sheet 194. E-mail from Junious Babbs to Bonnie Lesley, June 12, 2001, relating to information on program evaluation 195. 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 196. 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 197. E-mail from Dennis Glasgow to Ed Williams, July 3, 2001, requesting additional ALT reports 198. 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 199. PreK-3 Literacy Plan (with needs assessment, see pp. 12-26), June 1999 200. Memorandum to Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, June 24, 1999, requesting their review of the proposed PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan 201. Report on Level of ELLA training for K-2 teachers, May 10, 2000 202. Definition of Proficient for the Developmental Reading Assessment, K-2, May 2000 203. Report on Spring 2000 Developmental Reading Assessment, Percent At or Above Readiness 204. Correlation StudyAmount of Training Hours and Student Achievement on the Developmental Reading Assessment, Spring 2000 205. Correlation StudyMultiple Comparisons of Effect of Four Approaches to Literacy Development, Spring 2000 206. Executive Summary, Title I/Elementary Literacy Program Evaluation, July 2000 14207. Title I/Elementary Literacy Program Evaluation, August 2000 208. 2000 Updated Draft of Title I/PreK-3 Literacy Plan Program Evaluation, December 209. 2001 Progress Report on Elementary Literacy Plan to Board of Education, January 210. Update on Implementation of the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan, June 2001, presented to Board of Education 211. Copies of slide presentation to Board of Education on PreK-3 Literacy Program, June 2001 212. 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. 213. E-mail to elementary principals and other staff from Bonnie Lesley, June 29, 2001, attaching tables of DRA results by middle school feeder pattern. 214. 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 ofMemphis 215. 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 216. 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 217. 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 218. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to selected SFA staff, Oct. 8, 1999, setting up training on Success for All 219. 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 220. 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. 15221. 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. 222. Report on Success for All Inservice activities, 1999-2000 School Year 223. Reports from eight-week assessments in Success for All schools, 1999-2000. 224. Success for All Implementation Report for December 1, 1999 (site visit reports from the University of Memphis that are done twice annually) 225. Success for All Implementation Reports for Spring 2001 (site visit reports from the University of Memphis that are done twice annually) 226. Executive Summary, English as a Second Language Program Evaluation, July 2000 227. English as a Second Language Program Evaluation (submitted to Office of Civil Rights), October 2000Proposal to National Science Foundation, Aug. 1, 1998, to fund Collaborative Partnerships in Mathematics and Science Achievement (see pp. 2-4 for needs assessment). 228. Management Plan for Year One, 1998-99, CPMSA (based on proposal for funding to the National Science Foundation. 229. 1999-2000 Strategic Plan, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 230. September 2000February 2002 Strategic Plan, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 231. September 1, 2000August 31, 2003 Strategic Plan, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 232. Revised Three-Year Strategic Plan, April 11, 2001, CPMSA (based on data analysis and decisions about next steps) 233. Annual Progress Report, 1998-99, submitted to the National Science Foundation. 234. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Carnine, May 20, 1999, with follow-up report to Site Visit of April 27-29, 1999. 235. Document prepared for December 3, 1999, Site Visit: Relationship of CPMSA Goals and LRSD Quality Indicators 236. Agenda for NSF Site Visit, December 3, 1999 16237. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, January 24, 2000, with follow-up report to Site Visit of December 1-3, 1999. 238. Annual Progress Report, 1999-2000, submitted to the National Science Foundation. 239. Copy of slide presentation to the National Science Foundation Site Visit team. December 1-3, 1999. 240. Letter from National Science Foundation to Dr. Les Camine, January 16, 2001, with follow-up report to Site Visit of December 6-8, 2000. 241. Copy of slide presentation to Board of Education relating to CPMSA progress. January 2001. 242. Copy of slide presentation to the National Science Foundation Midpoint Review (reverse site visit) in Washington, DC, February 5, 2001. 243. 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. 244. 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 245. 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 246. 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. 247. Program EvaluationBenchmark ExaminationOpen Response Mathematics Items: Student Outcomes of a Targeted Initiative with 4* Grade Students, 1998-99. 248. Program EvaluationACTAAP Benchmark Examination Mathematics Results, Grades 4 and 8, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 249. Program EvaluationDistrict Criterion Referenced Tests (CRTs), Higher-Level Mathematics and Science, 3^^ Quarter, 2000-01 250. Program EvaluationStanford Achievement Test, 9* Edition, Mathematics Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 17251. Program EvaluationStanford Achievement Test, 9* Edition, Science Reasoning Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 252. Program EvaluationAdvanced Placement Test: Mathematics Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 253. Program EvaluationAdvanced Placement Test\nScience Results, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 254. Program EvaluationAmerican College Test Results for 8* Grade EXPLORE, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 255. Program EvaluationAmerican College Test Results for 10* Grade PLAN, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 256. Program EvaluationAmerican College Test Results for 12* Grade ACT Test, 1997-98 to 2000-01. 257. Program EvaluationCompre\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_1703","title":"Court filings: District Court, order; District Court, notice of filing compliance report and request for scheduling order; District Court, motion for withdrawal of appearance; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool; District Court, order","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["2001-03"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Arkansas. Department of Education","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Little Rock School District","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School employees","School integration","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, order; District Court, notice of filing compliance report and request for scheduling order; District Court, motion for withdrawal of appearance; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool; District Court, order"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1703"],"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":["22 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  - FILED .=,,A, _UE.S. DISTRICT COURT 1 RN DISTRICT ARKANSAS MAR,O f 200f IN 11IB UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT '., \\ EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS ~A!\"fE~jW- Mqe~RJ.f~K, CLERK WESTERN DMSION  y -v 1 ~~ ~ bl'\u003e]/\\ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT * * Plaintiff: * * vs. r * Case No. 4:82CV00866 SWW * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL * DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. * * ECEIVED Defendants, * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. * AR 2 200\\ * Intervenors, * OffiCEOf * OESEGRE~1lotl  KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. * * Intervenors. * ORDER The Pu1aski County Special School District moves the Court for an Order authorizing a special election to be held May 8, 2001. See docket entry 3400. The District states the proposed election is for the purpose of placing before the voters for approval a millage increase sufficient to finance an ambitious program of school fucility enhancement. There have been no responses or objections to the motion, and the Court finds that the motion should be granted. TIIEREFORE, the Court hereby grants the motion and approves the special millage election to be held in the Pu1aski County Special School District on May 8, 2001. dt SO ORDERED this _j_ day of March 2001. ~.\u0026-~ F JUDGE  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DEPCLERJ\u003c'-.. ~ DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN ..,OMPUAN3_ C; WITH RULE 58 ANO'OR 79(~ FRCP )R_ .  \u003cX~CJf.. IV ::'!:?- -~-_;.--~,- 3409 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DNISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. LR-C-82-866 . , Qff.!;R RECEI\\.Y ~u PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL MAR 1 ~ 200\\ OF.ICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING NOTICE OF FILING COMPLIANCE REPORT AND REQUEST FOR SCHEDULING ORDER PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTER VEN ORS The Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\" or \"District\") for its Notice of Filing Compliance Report and Request for Scheduling Order states: 1. LRSD hereby files the attached Compliance Report in accordance with Section 11 of its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (\"Revised Plan\"). LRSD has substantially and in good faith complied with terms of the Revised Plan. A brief summary of each section of the Compliance Report is set forth below. 2. Good Faith. During the term of the Revised Plan, LRSD attempted to demonstrate its good faith by complying with its plan obligations. To manifest its good faith commitment for the future, the LRSD Board of Directors (\"Board\") on January 11, 2001, adopted a \"Covenant for the Future,\" in which the Board promised to continue fighting discrimination, providing equity and improving the academic achievement of all students. A key component of the District's success under the Revised Plan was the establishment of Campus Leadership Teams (\"CL Ts\") at each school. The CLTs provide the horsepower driving the District's efforts to improve student achievement. The District invested heavily in providing training to the CLTs and school principals in Total Quality Management (\"TQM\"). - All principals received intensive TQM training through the Arkansas Leadership Academy. The District's focus on quality leadership has not gone without recognition. In the fall of 2000, the District received the Quality Commitment Award from the non-profit group Arkansas Quality Award. This award recognized the District as an organization that has a plan and commitment to quality management. The District's development ofleadership talent should pay substantial dividends in the future. 3. Faculty and Staff. LRSD had a strong record in the area of faculty and staff even before adopting the Revised Plan. Even so, the District worked hard to recruit, develop and promote increased numbers of qualified African-Americans. Under the Revised Plan, the District increased the percentage of African-American administrators and teachers, and it increased the number of African-American media specialists, counselors, secondary core subject teachers, early childhood teachers and primary grade teachers. The District also began tracking the distribution of the most experienced and educated teachers in an effort to better ensure an equitable distribution of these teachers. 4. Student Assignment. In accordance with the Revised Plan, the District revised student attendance zones to allow students to go to their neighborhood schools to the extent possible. While this resulted in an increase in the number of racially identifiable schools and schools more than 20 percentage points from the district-wide percentage of African-American students, the increases were not dramatic. Moreover, the large number of alternative assignment choices available to students helped minimize any adverse effect resulting from the neighborhood school zone plan. This year twenty-percent of the District's students chose to attend a school other than their zone school. 5. Special Education. While African-American students remain disproportionately represented among special education students, a review of the District's programs, policies, and procedures revealed no vestiges of racial discrimination in the referral and placement of students in special education or other special needs programs. Furthermore, since 1998-99 the increase in the number of African-American students identified with disabilities has been in proportion to 2 their increase in the total student population. There has been only two percent growth in the number of identified students with disabilities since 1998-99, with the percentage of AfricanAmerican students remaining just about the same. The two percent growth correlates with the increase in total student enrollment over the same period, as well as an increase in the percentage of students qualifying for free/reduced lunch eligibility. 6. Discipline. The number of African-American students suspended decreased 20 percent from 1997-98 through 1999-2000. This was consistent with a 21 percent decrease in the total number of disciplinary sanctions. For the same time period, the number of students committing offenses decreased 16 percent. 1:hus, fewer student are committing offenses, and those that do commit offenses are less likely to commit a second offense. The behavior modification plans being implemented pursuant to the Revised Plan may account for this decrease. The decrease in discipline sanctions positively impacted parents' and teachers' perceptions of District schools. A survey of parents and teachers conducted during the 1999-2000 school year revealed that 93 percent of African-American parents and 95 percent of white/other parents who expressed an opinion agreed that their child was safe at school. Ninety-one percent of both African-American and white/other parents who expressed an opinion agreed that their child has a feeling of belonging at school. Ninety-seven percent of African-American teachers and 96 percent of white/other teachers who expressed an opinion indicated that they felt safe at school. 7. Extracurricular Activities. Extracurricular activities increased dramatically under the Revised Plan. The number of African-American students participating in extracurricular activities jumped from 2,335 to 5,203 from 1997-98 through 1999-2000. A large part of the increase in participation resulted from a \"no-cut\" policy in athletics for middle school six graders and the use of Supplemental Instructional Plans (\"SIPs\"). SIPs allow students who otherwise would be academically ineligible for athletics to continue participating in athletics while they attend tutoring to improve their grades. The District also organized an Activities Advisory Board to promote, support and enhance the activities available in the District. 3 The 1999-2000 survey of parents and teachers also reflected the District's success in the area of extracurricular activities. Ninety percent of African-American parents and 93 percent of white/other parents who expressed an opinion agreed that activities were open to students. Ninety-three percent of African-American teachers and 95 percent of white/other teachers who expressed an opinion agreed that students have opportunities for activities. 8. Advanced Placement Courses. New policies and procedures for placement of students in advanced courses greatly improved access and participation for all students, and especially African-American students. New programs have the potential of producing exponential growths in both participation and success in advanced courses in the next few years. The increasing number of African-American students participating and succeeding in advanced courses perhaps provides the best reason to be optimistic about the District's future. With regard to Advanced Placement (\"AP\") courses, the total enrollment of AfricanAmerican students increased from 471 in 1997-98 to 797 in 2000-01-an increase of 326 students or 69 percent. The total enrollment of white/other students in AP courses increased from 964 in 1997-98 to 1495 in 2000-01-an increase of 531 students or 55 percent. The total enrollment of all students in AP courses increased from 1435 in 1997-98 to 2292 in 2000-01-an increase of 857 students or 60 percent. The number of AP courses taught increased from 16 in 1997-98 to 20 in 2000-01; whereas, the average high school in the United States teaches only six AP courses. With regard to high school Pre-AP courses, the total number of high school students enrolled improved from 5065 in 1999-2000 to 5953 in 2000-01-an increase of 888 students or 15 percent. African-American student enrollment improved at a slightly higher rate-from 2341 in 1999-2000 to 2715 in 2000-01-an increase of 374 students or 16 percent. White/other student enrollment also improved-from 2724 in 1999-2000 to 3238 in 2000-01-an increase of 514 or 15 percent. With regard to middle school Pre-AP courses, African-American student enrollment grew 937 from 1999-2000 to 2000-01-an increase of 19 percent. White/other student enrollment in 4 middle school Pre-AP courses grew 1076 in one year-a 24 percent improvement. The total middle school Pre-AP enrollment grew by 2013 students-a 22 percent improvement. In contrast to the enrollment in the high school AP courses, where African-American enrollment was 35 percent of the total in 2000-01, the African-American enrollment in middle school Pre-AP courses was 51 percent of the total. In sixth grade Pre-AP/GT English courses there were 908 students enrolled in 2000-01 . At the high school level there were 261 students enrolled in English m AP in 2000-01 . If the current grade six students stay in the pipeline for advanced course enrollment, the English ill AP enrollment could improve 250 percent in a few years. The number of AP examinations taken increased from 422 in 1997-98 to 524 in 1999- 2000-an increase of24 percent. Although the percentage of students earning a \"3\" or higher on the AP examinations went down from 60 percent in 1997-98 to 52 percent in 1999-2000, the number of students earning a \"3\" or higher improved from 252 in 1997-98 to 268 in 1999-2000. With regard to the ACT, the most common college entrance exam taken by LRSD students, the number oftest-takers improved from 786 in 1997-98 to 1026 in 1999-2000 for an increase of240 or 31 percent. The number of African-American test takers improved from 410 to 570-an increase of 160 students or 39 percent. The number of white test takers also increased-from 268 in 1997-98 to 345 in 1999-2000-an improvement of77 students or 29 percent. African-American students improved their English scores from 17.2 in 1997-98 to 17.4 in 1999-2000, their Science Reasoning scores from 17.2 to 17.4, and their average composite scores from 17.2 to 17.3. While small increases, they represent a substantial accomplishment given that test scores usually decrease when the number of test-takers increases. African-American students' willingness to move into more rigorous academic courses may reflect their belief that they will get the support they need to succeed. In the 1999-2000 parent survey, 88 percent of African-American parents who expressed on opinion agreed that their child received academic support. Eighty-six percent of white/other parents who expressed an opinion agreed with this statement. 5 9. Academic Achievement. The District completely revised its policies, procedures, and programs to facilitate and enhance academic achievement of all students, especially AfricanAmerican students. The District implemented new standards-based curricula, effective teaching strategies, aligned materials, and a re-designed and a comprehensive professional development program in fall 1999 and expanded in fall 2000 in English language arts, mathematics, and science, K-9. School year 2001-02 will see expansions into grades 10-12, as well as K-12 social studies and the beginning of fine arts program planning. Efforts included the addition of several new student support programs, many of which were funded through federal, state, and foundation grants. This District set high expectations for its students by raising graduation standards. Beginning in 2002, seniors must have a minimum of24 units to graduate, and beginning in 2004, they must have 26 units. In addition, the District published a \"Recommended Curriculum\" for high school students that includes eight advanced courses in the 28 units that students are encouraged to complete. The District secured several major grants as a part of its efforts to improve academic achievement. They are as follows:  A $3.4 million grant from the National Science Foundation to support improvements in mathematics and science;  A $7.8 million Safe Schools/Healthy Students grant from the United States Department of Education to support implementation of new programs aligned with the District's transition of the junior highs to middle schools;  Two multi-million dollar 21 st Century Learning Community grants from the United States Department of Education to develop and support after-school and summer programs to support student achievement;  A $250,000 planning grant from the Carnegie Foundation to support a year of planning for high school reform and improvements in student achievement. 6 An $11 million grant proposal was submitted to the Department of Education in December 2000 to develop magnet curricula at four southwestern Little Rock schools. One challenge the District faces in its effort to improve academic achievement is students arriving for kindergarten without the necessary social or learning skills. To meet this challenge, the District went beyond the requirements of Revised Plan in funding (with no assistance from the State) an early childhood program. The District implemented new four-year-old classes in 1999- 2000 and again in 2000-01. In 2000-01 there were 954 four-year-olds enrolled-234 more than the 720 required by the Revised Plan. In addition, early childhood enrollment included 254 children served in the HIPPY program; 23 infants, toddlers, and three-year olds at Metropolitan; 63 infants, toddlers, and three-year-olds at Rockefeller; and 18 three-year-olds at Washington-for a total of 1058. The District implemented new procedures and programs for early childhood education designed to improve children's kindergarten \"readiness\" level. Specifically with regard to reading and language arts, the District developed its PreK-3 Literacy Plan to guide implementation of new standards-based curricula, instructional strategies, materials, and assessments across all schools. The District invested heavily in professional development for all teachers and in the purchase of classroom sets of materials for students. Consistent with the Revised Plan, the District established a two and one-half hour block of time for the teaching ofreading and language arts in grades K-3. To measure success of the PreK-3 Literacy Plan, the District administers the Observation Survey and the Developmental Reading Assessment in kindergarten through grade two. Both are informal reading inventories that are administered one-on-one. They are administered both in the fall and spring so growth can be measured. The results from the 1999 fall pre-test showed that white kindergarten students began with a score of more than two ( a score of two indicates readiness for the next grade level), as compared to African-American students whose fall pre-test score was less than one. Thus, white students began kindergarten with a higher level of readiness. On the spring post-test, the kindergarten class had the highest percentage of students scoring at or 7 above readiness (72.2 percent) of any of the three grades tested, perhaps as a result of the new Animated Literacy program in phonemic awareness that was introduced in fall 1999, along with the new ELLA strategies and materials. Both African-American and white students improved significantly from the pre-test to the post-test. On average, African-American kindergarten students' post-test scores were 43 percent of that of their white counterparts. First graders performed the poorest of the three grades tested in terms of the percentage of students scoring at or above readiness at the end of the school year ( 53. 6 percent), perhaps indicating the need for the Animated Literacy program for these students. All first graders improved, but white students improved the most, probably because the reading skills that they began the year with enabled them to progress faster. However, the average score for AfricanAmerican first graders was 65 percent of that of their white peers, suggesting a narrowing of the achievement gap that existed when the students entered the District. All second graders' scores improved significantly over the course of the year, just as they did in kindergarten and first grade, with 67.5 percent at or above the readiness level on the spring post-test. On average, African-American student's scores were 77 percent of that of their white peers, an increase from 43 percent in kindergarten and 65 percent in first grade. This again suggests that the District may be having success in narrowing the achievement gap which exists when students enter the District. With regard to reading and language arts in the intermediate grades, the District implemented new standards-based curricula, instructional strategies, materials, and assessments across the District in fall 1999, just as with the primary grades. The District emphasized Effective Literacy in professional development for intermediate grade teachers. While the District is still not where it would like to be, the results from the State Benchmark Exam taken by fourth graders showed substantial improvement. Scores improved from 32 percent at the proficient/advanced levels in 1998-99 to 42 percent in 1999-2000-an improvement of 31 percent. African-American students improved almost 10 points on the exam, 8 a 50 percent improvement, and white students improved four points, a seven percent improvement. The gap between the scores of African-American and white students narrowed six points in 1999-2000, from 42 points to 36 points. The rate of improvement of African-American students was 43 points higher than for white students. The District had many fewer grade four students performing at the lowest level in 1999-2000 than in 1998-99-a reduction of 13 percentage points or a 32 percent decrease. Additionally, fewer African-American students performed at the Below Basic level-a reduction of 16 percentage points or a 31 percent decrease. White students in the lowest level were reduced by seven percentage points for a 41 percent decrease. The gap between white and African-American students in the Below Basic level was 35 points in 1998-99 and was reduced to 26 points in 1999-2000. Reading scores also improved for fifth graders on the Stanford Achievement Test (91h Edition) (\"SAT9\") from 1999-2000. The average percentile score for all students improved five points, for African-American students improved five points, and for white students improved one point. Compared to the SAT9 scores from the fall of 1997, the average percentile score for all students improved five points, for African-American students improved seven points, and for white students improved four points. The achievement gap in reading narrowed from 46 percentile points in 1997-98 to 43 percentile points in 2000-01. Fifth graders' language scores on the SAT9 also improved from 1999-2000. The average percentile score for all students improved four points and for African-American students improved six points. Compared to the SAT9 scores from the fall of 1997, the average percentile score for all students improved four points, for African-American student improved seven points, and for white students improved one point. The achievement gap in language narrowed from 36 percentile points in fall 1997 to 30 percentile points in fall 2000. With regard to math and science, the District implemented new standards-based curricula, instructional strategies, and materials in K-9. The District funded these efforts in large part with 9 the grant from the National Science Foundation. Major investments occurred in professional development and in the purchase of new materials. The scores of fourth graders on the State Benchmark Exam provide a reason for optimism. The State administered the grade four State Benchmark Exam in mathematics for the second time in spring 2000. The District's scores showed significant improvements for all students (eight points), for African-American students (seven points), and white students (eight points). Although the gap widened one point between African-American and white students in 1999-2000 (from 45 to 46 points), the percentage improvement for African-American students was much greater than that of white students, 88 percent compared to 15 percent. The District's grade four as a whole saw fewer students performing at the lowest level in 1999-2000 as compared to 1998-99-a reduction of four percentage points or a seven percent decrease. Additionally, fewer African-American students performed at the lowest level-a reduction of five percentage points or a seven percent decrease. The gap between white and African-American students in the Below Basic level shrank from 50 points in 1998-99 to 45 points in 1999-2000. Fifth graders' mathematics scores improved slightly on the fall 2000 SAT9, with all students' scores up one percentile point and African-American students' scores up two percentile points. Compared to fall 1997 SAT9, the average percentile scores for all students improved one point and for African-American students improved four points. The achievement gap narrowed slightly from 1997-98 to 2000-01, from 36 to 32 percentile points. Tenth graders' SAT9 mathematics scores also improved. Their teachers had had initial training in a standards-based curriculum, and the students were the first required to take physics in the ninth grade. From 1999-2000 to 2000-01, the average percentile scores for all students improved four points, for African American students improved one point, and for white students improved six points. 10. Parental Involvement. The District already had a plethora of parent and community involvement policies, procedures, and programs when the Revised Plan was approved in 1998. Accordingly, the District directed it efforts to widening the outreach, focusing on the school level, and creating a more coherent leadership structure at the district level. The District began including parents and community representatives on CLTs, and the Board approved a Parent Program Restructuring Plan which consolidated all parent programs under the direction of one Collaborative Action Team. 11. Equitable Allocation of Resources. The District developed a unique method of reviewing equity in the allocation of resources. Each year the resource allocation review revealed no correlation between resources allocated to a school and the school's racial composition. Moreover, the District used the results of the review in making resource allocation decisions, such as allocating grant and Title I funding. 12. Guidance and Counseling. The 1999-2000 survey of parents revealed that 94 percent of all parents, both African-American and white/other, who expressed an opinion agreed that help and guidance was available to their child. This perception has proven a reality at least with regard to scholarship money received by African-Americans. Of the 301 scholarships awarded in the 1998-99 school year, 147 or 49 percent went to African-American students totaling $3,256,207 or 47 percent of the total dollar amount of scholarships awarded. For 1999- 2000 school year, African-American students received a total of 185 scholarships valued at $3,716,358. African-American students represented 56 percent of the scholarship recipients and received 58 percent of the total dollar amount of scholarships awarded. African-American females outpaced all other groups in the number received (105) and the dollar value of scholarships awarded ($1,967,654). 13. Cultural Sensitivity. Since the 1999-2000 school year, the District has been providing cultural sensitivity training through Dr. Terrence Roberts, one of the \"Little Rock Nine\" and a desegregation consultant for the District approved by the Joshua lntervenors. His workshop, entitled \"Learning to Cope with Differences,\" provides strategies for dealing with differences in race, ethnicity, gender, economics, disabilities, religion and other characteristics that 11 I can divide people and create unhealthy tension. The 1999-2000 survey of teachers suggests that the District has done well in this regard. Ninety-four percent of African-American teachers and 93 percent of white/other teachers who expressed an opinion agreed that District administrators value diversity. Eighty-eight percent of African-American teachers and 92 percent of white/other teachers who expressed an opinion agreed that personnel respond to cultural differences. 14. Compliance. Section 8 of the Revised Plan included a procedure for parties to raise issues related to the District's compliance. This procedure was invoked on only five occasions, with the last being in December of 1999. All of those issues were resolved without the necessity of court intervention. 15. The Revised Plan obligated LRSD to implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to achieve certain outcomes, and it has done so. Although the Revised Plan did not obligate LRSD to achieve any particular outcomes, the Compliance Report includes information on outcomes which was used by LRSD to evaluate the programs, policies and procedures being implemented. 16. Section 11 of the Revised Plan provides: At the conclusion of the 2000-01 school year, the district court shall enter an order releasing LRSD from court supervision and finding LRSD unitary with regard to all aspects of school operations provided that LRSD has substantially complied with its obligations set forth in this Revised Plan. In anticipation of release, LRSD shall issue a report on March 15, 2001, indicating the state ofLRSD's compliance with the Revised Plan. Any party challenging LRSD's compliance bears the burden of proof If no party challenges LRSD's compliance, the above-described order shall be entered without further proceedings. LRSD has substantially complied with its obligations set forth in the Revised Plan. If no party challenges LRSD's compliance, an order should be entered finding LRSD unitary with regard to all aspects of school operations. 17. LRSD respectfully requests that the Court issue a scheduling order establishing a period not exceeding 20 days for parties to file challenges to LRSD's compliance pursuant to Section 11 of the Revised Plan. This should be sufficient time given that the parties have known when this report would be filed since April 10, 1998, and that Section 8 of the Revised Plan 12 required parties to raise compliance issues \"as soon as reasonably practicable.\" See Revised Plan, Section 8.2.1. If any party files a challenge on or before the deadline established by the Court, LRSD respectfully requests that a hearing on the challenge be held before June 30, 2001, the end of the 2000-2001 school year. WHEREFORE, LRSD prays that this Court immediately issue a scheduling order establishing a period not exceeding 20 days for parties to file challenges pursuant to Section 11 of the Revised Plan; that should a challenge be filed by a party, a hearing be held on the challenge before June 30, 2001; and that should no party file a challenge on or before the deadline established by the Court, that on June 30, 2001, this Court enter an order finding LRSD unitary with regard to all aspects of school operations. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-~-i--- 13 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by handdelivery on March 15, 2001 : . Mr. John W. Walker JOHNW. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 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 72222-73 88 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates \u0026 Woodward 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1800 Little Rock, AR 72201-3525 14 RECEIVED MAR 1 s 2001 Little Rock School District Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Compliance Report March 15, 2001 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. RECEIVED MAR 2 s zam lllll\u0026EJ~ WfMONllURINQJ PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE I, Tim C. Humphries, hereby move to withdraw my appearance as counsel on behalf of separate defendant Arkansas Department of Education in the above-captioned matter. I, Tim C. Humphries, am no longer employed with the Office of the Attorney General, and separate defendant - Arkansas Department of Education is now represented in this matter by Chief Barrister Sammye L. Taylor and Assistant Attorney General Mark A. Hagemeier of the Office of the Attorney General. WHEREFORE, I, Tim C. Humphries, respectfully request that this motion be granted and that the Court direct the clerk of the court to remove me as counsel for separate defendant Arkansas Department of Education. By: Respectfully Submitted, TIM C. HUMPHRIES1. Secretary of State's Office State Capitol, Room 256 Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 682-3016 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Tim C. Humphries, certify that on l_k of March, 2001, I caused a copy of the foregoing document to be served by U.S. mail, postige prepaid, on the following person( s) at the address( es) indicated: M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 7220 I John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 7220 I Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 7220 I Timothy Gauger Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates \u0026 Woodyard 425 West Capitol Ave. Suite 1800 Little Rock, AR 72201-3525 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Tim c:Humphries 2 I I I , ' . I i II J IN THE UNITED STA TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DJSTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION RECEIVED APR 12 2001 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFiCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of ADE's Project Management Tool for March, 2001 . Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General Assistant Attorney Ge 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-3643 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Mark A. Hagemeier, certify that on March 28, 200 l, I caused a copy of the foregoing doc "},{"id":"vrc_pec_35991","title":"Peebles Department Store in Appomattox Court House, Va., 2001","collection_id":"vrc_pec","collection_title":"Edward H. Peeples Prince Edward County (Va.) Public Schools","dcterms_contributor":["Peeples, Edward H. (Edward Harden), 1935-","James Branch Cabell Library. Special Collections and Archives","VCU Libraries"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Virginia, Appomattox County, 37.37229, -78.81212"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2001-03"],"dcterms_description":["Peebles Department Store in Appomattox Court House, Appomattox County, Va. Peebles Department store founder has common Virginia ancestors with Edward H. Peeples.","Peebles Department Store"],"dc_format":["image/tiff"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Edward H. Peeples Prince Edward County (Va.) Public Schools"],"dcterms_subject":["Department stores","Department stores--Virginia--Appomattox County--Pictorial works"],"dcterms_title":["Peebles Department Store in Appomattox Court House, Va., 2001"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["James Branch Cabell Library. Special Collections and Archives"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://digital.library.vcu.edu/islandora/object/vcu%3A35991"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["In Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Permitted","This material is protected by copyright, and copyright is held by VCU. You are permitted to use this material in any way that is permitted by copyright. In addition, this material is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/). Acknowledgment of Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries as a source is required."],"dcterms_medium":["color negatives"],"dcterms_extent":["6 x 9 cm."],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0201","title":"Oral history interview with James Atwater, February 28, 2001","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Nardone, Jennifer","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Orange County, 36.0613, -79.1206","United States, North Carolina, Orange County, Chapel Hill, 35.9132, -79.05584"],"dcterms_creator":["Atwater, James, 1932-"],"dc_date":["2001-02-28"],"dcterms_description":["James Atwater discusses life in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, from the 1930s to the 1950s. Atwater grew up in Chapel Hill, as did his parents and grandparents. In this interview, he discusses how neighbors in the black community interacted in various social, religious, and academic activities. He also talks about the impact of segregation on this community and on the schools. White supremacy in Chapel Hill was easily maintained by the community's reliance on the University of North Carolina. Atwater's parents worked for UNC, as did many other black residents, so they were directly dependent on white university officials for their finances. Much of his consciousness about segregation in Chapel Hill came from comparing it to places such as Durham, Carrboro, and Philadelphia. He left Chapel Hill in the 1950s.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Lincoln High School (Chapel Hill, N.C.)","Segregation in education--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Chapel Hill (N.C.)--Race relations--20th century","African Americans--North Carolina--Chapel Hill--Social life and customs--20th century","African Americans--North Carolina--Chapel Hill--Attitudes","Orange County Training School (Chapel Hill, N.C.)","Chapel Hill (N.C.)-- Race relations"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with James Atwater, February 28, 2001"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0201/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Title from menu page (viewed on July 11, 2007).","Interview participants: James Atwater, interviewee; Jennifer Nardone, interviewer.","Duration: 01:18:24.","This electronic edition is part of the UNC-CH digital library, Documenting the American South. It is a part of the collection Oral histories of the American South.","Text encoded by Mike Millner. Sound recordings digitized by Aaron Smithers."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Atwater, James, 1932-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0211","title":"Oral history interview with Barbara Lorie, February 26, 2001","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Froemming, Melissa","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Orange County, 36.0613, -79.1206","United States, North Carolina, Orange County, Chapel Hill, 35.9132, -79.05584"],"dcterms_creator":["Lorie, Barbara"],"dc_date":["2001-02-26"],"dcterms_description":["After the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Barbara Lorie became radicalized. She worked at Durham Academy for a year before Chapel Hill High principal May Marshbanks hired her as a literature teacher at the newly built integrated high school. There she employed unconventional teaching methods to eliminate racial barriers within her classroom. The Chapel Hill superintendent of schools as well as white Chapel Hill parents questioned Lorie's tactics because of the uncomfortable atmosphere they felt it created for blacks and whites. Following the resultant demotion, Lorie quit and worked for Pinecrest High School in Southern Pines. There she encountered similar racial tensions between the students, leading her to conclude that racism is endemic. She argues that racism breeds violence, and she blames television for perpetuating a dominant and violent white male culture. Lorie also contends that not only blacks but whites were psychologically damaged by segregation; she maintains that whites isolate themselves from other cultures and that blacks lose their cultural identities when not integrated into the dominant society. Lorie's social justice activism continues into her old age: she joined a predominantly black church to maintain an intimate relationship with blacks, and she identifies herself as a left-wing, environmentalist radical feminist.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Women teachers--North Carolina","Women civil rights workers--North Carolina","School integration--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","African Americans--North Carolina--Social conditions","North Carolina--Race relations"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Barbara Lorie, February 26, 2001"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0211/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Title from menu page (viewed on Nov. 10, 2008).","Interview participants: Barbara Lorie, interviewee; Melissa Froemming, interviewer.","Duration: 01:15:40.","This electronic edition is part of the UNC-Chapel Hill digital library, Documenting the American South. It is a part of the collection Oral histories of the American South.","Text encoded by Jennifer Joyner. Sound recordings digitized by Aaron Smithers."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Lorie, Barbara"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47857","title":"Wax of Mrs. Parks [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2001-02-26"],"dcterms_description":["Title and date from item."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of: Visual Materials from the Rosa Parks Papers (Library of Congress)."],"dcterms_subject":null,"dcterms_title":["Wax of Mrs. Parks [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.47857"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Use digital image. Original served only by appointment because material requires special handling. For more information, see (http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/info/617_apptonly.html)","Publication may be restricted. For general information see \"Visual Materials from the Rosa Parks Papers...,\" (http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/res/689_park.html)"],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor2000-2010.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_k-0557","title":"Oral history interview with Joanne Peerman, February 24, 2001","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Gilgor, Bob","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Orange County, 36.0613, -79.1206","United States, North Carolina, Orange County, Chapel Hill, 35.9132, -79.05584"],"dcterms_creator":["Peerman, Joanne"],"dc_date":["2001-02-24"],"dcterms_description":["Joanne Peerman, a member of one of the first integrated classes at Chapel Hill High School and daughter of \"bigger than life\" Coach Peerman, grew up in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, and attended both segregated and integrated schools. This interview reveals some of the complex dynamics involved in civil rights protest: conflicts within families and concerns about retaliation, the influence of the media, and young people's passionate but not always focused efforts at protest. To Peerman and her fellow junior high and high school students, civil rights protest was not just about achieving certain goals, like diversifying the cheerleading team. It was also an opportunity to test their relationship with teachers and administrators, to assert themselves physically and intellectually, and to simply have fun. This interview also offers a portrait of one of Lincoln High School's iconic figures, Coach Peerman.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Chapel Hill (N.C.)--Race relations","School integration--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","African Americans--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Lincoln High School (Chapel Hill, N.C.)","Segregation in education--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Civil rights demonstrations--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","African American students--Education--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","African American students--Civil rights--North Carolina--Chapel Hill","Chapel Hill High School (Chapel Hill, N.C.)"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Joanne Peerman, February 24, 2001"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/K-0557/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Duration: 01:33:45"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Peerman, Joanne"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":369,"next_page":370,"prev_page":368,"total_pages":6797,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":4416,"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}}]}}