{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_367","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Student Academic Improvement Plans (SAIPs) Using Data to Improve Individual Student Performance''","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":["1999/2001"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Student Academic Improvement Plans (SAIPs) Using Data to Improve Individual Student Performance''"],"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/367"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"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\nSTUDENT ACADEMIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS (SAIPs) -USING DATA TO IMPROVE INDIVIDUAL STUDENT PERFORMANCE0-1 ozo5o mm z o in Student Academic Improvement Plans (SAIPs)Using Data to Improve Individual Student Performance 1. 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 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 Memorandum to Board of Education, Aug. 24, 2000, requesting approval of the attached administrative regulations (IHBDA-R2) and review of other information E-mail to Dennis Glasgow, Patricia Price, and Suzi Davis, Sept. 15, 2000, requesting that they develop sample SAIPs for the teachers to use ''7 Memorandum in Sept. 20, 2000, Learning Links to all principals from Bonnie Lesley stating a philosophy relating to the SAIPs Memorandum in Sept. 20, 2000, Learning Links to elementary principals from Patricia Price clarifying the use of data in SAIPs and attaching sample SAIPs Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to all middle school principals from Suzi Davis providing information on SAIPs and attaching sample SAIPs Memorandum in Sept. 27, 2000, Learning Links to all middle school principals from Suzi Davis on how to use the SAIP form for parent conferencing 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 E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 21, 2000, from Lillie Carter expressing appreciation for the copy of the SAIP philosophy and the sample SAIPs 10. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 27, 2000, from Eleanor Cox expressing appreciation for the SAIP philosophy and for the sample SAIPs 11. E-mail to middle school principals, Sept. 29, 2000, from Suzi Davis providing more assistance with SAIPs 12. 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 SAIPs1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 November 15,1999 TO: Gary Smith (or designee) Mable Donaldson Patricia Price Leon Adams Karen Broadnax Eddie McCoy Vanessa Cleaver Linda Austin Sadie Mitchell (or designee) Everett Hawks Marion Baldwin Suzi Davis I FROM: SUBJECT: Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction Personalized Education Plan The states ACTAAP plan states the following: An academic improvement plan means a plan that details supplemental and/or intervention and remedial instruction in deficient academic areas. One shall be developed for each student no performing at the proficient level in every portion of the criterion - referenced examinations. Our 1999-200 Work Plan includes the following priority: 9. Develop Personalized Education Plan design for K-12 students for fall 2000 implementation. Dr. Carnine has stated more than once that'he envisions a personalized Education Plan for every student - not just those who are not performing at the proficient level. I think we can learn a lot about how to think about such plans from our colleagues in special education, so Dr. Smith may wish to add one or more to the committee. We should also add Clementine Kelly and other teacher representatives, and you need to be sure to include an ODM representative, plus some parents since the students plan development must certainly include parents. Personalized Education Plan Memo November 15, 1999 Page Two I request that Gary Smith call the first meeting, and then you all decide who should chair the greater committee. Your charge includes the following: 1. Determine the full committees membership. 2. Conduct research to determine what the critical attributes will be of the LRSD Personalized Education Plan. What are other Districts doing? 3. 4. 5. 6, 7. 8. 9. Will ADE publish a model? Review Mable Donaldsons directory of Personalized Education programs to consider available options/interventions. Consider how planning of electives at the middle school level fits into the plan. Consider how planning for graduation fits into the plan. What should the Boards policy say? The regulations? Design the process/procedures/forms. Design the training/professional development. Propose the necessary budget for implementation. 10. Lay out the plan to secure the support of teachers, students, and parents. 11 .Write a handbook for teachers and a brochure for parents. All this work must be completed by the end of June, but there's lots to do - especially communication to and from teachers - so we should get started now. I request that you provide me with frequent updates on how you are doing. Also, please let me know how you want me to help. Thanks to all of you in advance for the work youll do on this challenging project. We want to create processes that ensure the effectiveness of the PEP's not just create another paperwork exercise. BAL/rcm Cc: Les Carnine Kathy Lease Junious Babbs Suellen Vann Brady Gadberry Victor Anderson Linda Watson I2 TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 August 24, 2000 Board of Education ^r. Bonnie A. Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction THROUGH: Dr. Les Gamine, Superintendent, Little Rock School District SUBJECT: Student Academic Improvement Plan Act 999 of 1999 requires that schools develop student Academic Improvement Plans for all students not performing at grade level (K-4), those not proficient\" on any part of Benchmark examinations at primary (grade 4), intermediate (grade 6), and middle (grade 8) levels, and those not scoring at the \"proficient\" level on End-of-Course examinations in literacy, Algebra I, and Geometry. One of the priorities in the 1999-2000 work plan for the Division of Instruction was the development of a plan and process to comply with the mandate. Dr. Gary Smith chaired the committee (see names attached), and they involved a broader group of staff and parents in their design work. The administrative regulations (IHBDA-R2)to implement this plan are attached for the Board's review. Attachments BAL/rcm STUDENT ACADEMIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN (SAIP)- DRAFT COMMITTEE - Gary Smith, Janice Wyatt-Ross, Susan Colford, Eddie McCoy, Kathy Tatum, Everett Hawks, Mable Donaldson, Pat Price, Karen Broadnax, Leon Adams, Marion Baldwin, Jim Fullerton, Jim Fullerton, Ada Keown, Gail Bradford, Vanessa Cleaver, Linda Austin, Suzi Davis, Dennis Glascow, Gloria Billingsly, Joevelyn Elston, Cassandra Norman, Mona Briggs REGULATION - Act 999 of 1999 requiring Student Academic Improvement Plan for students not performing on grade level (K-4), not proficient on any part of Benchmark (primary, intermediate, middle), students not scoring proficient on End-of-Course exams in Literacy, Geometry, Algebra OUR CHARGE - To develop a plan and procedure to meet the requirements of Act 999. Specifically\nCONSIDERATIONS___________________ 1. Determine critical attributes of a P.E.P. COMMENTS________________________ Must be skill specific. Use a pre-assessment/post-assessment process. Must be user friendly and not overburdening to teachers. Must identify deficits and develop goals with suggested strategies. 2. How do electives at middle school and graduation planning fit? Should augment strategies recommended in SAIP. 3. What should the regulations say? 4. Design a process, procedure, and forms 5. Design training and professional development 6. Determine budget See attached draft. See attached draft. See attached plan. See attached budget considerations.I TRAINING AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRAINING NEED FOR TEACHERS Process and procedures of SAIP Interpretation of assessment Development of strategies RESOURCES AVAILABLE SAIP committee to train trainers to train school site teachers. _________________ Planning Research, and Evaluation staff to train trainers to train school site teachers. Curriculum specialists, Special Education teachers, GT specialists. Embed in all curriculum trainings. Include The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual (and other text resources) in schools professional libraries. Secure The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual computer version for access by teachers. Computer access to The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual and interactive WEB site for the posting and reading of strategies. Develop interactive WEB site for the posting and reading of strategies.________ Computer services to train trainers to train school site teachers in the use of software. BUDGET - APPROXIMATE ITEM SAIP forms in triplicate_ The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual - computer version COST PER ITEM .10 $36.00 $190.00 QUANTITY 20,000 One per school (52 schools) One per school (52 schools) TOTAL COST $2,000.00 $1,872.00 $9,880.00 Additional costs to be identified: Development of interactive WEB site Materials for staff development Refreshments for staff development Stipends for teachers to attend ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS Parents can be informed of the process for SAIP via District wide publications, WEB site, television station, PTA meetings, etc. Parent/Teachers conferences would need to be scheduled to assure time for teachers to have assessment results available to use in SAIP. Develop processes to produce individual student printouts of assessment results on a SAIP template and/or available on disk, allowing teachers to utilize computers to create computer documents of the SAIP. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IHBDA-R2 STUDENT ACADEMIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN (SAIP) In compliance with Act 999 of 1999, elementary classroom teachers and both middle and high school teachers of English language arts and mathematics will develop a Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) for each student who  is not performing on grade level (K-4)\n is not proficient on any part of the states Benchmark examinationsprimary (grade 4), intermediate (grade 6), middle (grade 8)\nand  is not scoring proficient on End-of-Course examinations in literacy, geometry, and/or algebra. Grade-level performance in grades K-2 shall be defined as performing at or above the readiness level on the Developmental Reading Assessment. Grade-level performance in grades 3-4 shall be defined as performing at or above the national median on the Achievement Level Tests (ALTs) in reading, language, and mathematics. Schools and individual teachers are encouraged to develop plans for additional students who, in their judgment, require remediation or intervention. The Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) will document a students achievement through District-adopted assessment tools, consideration of personalized education services (special education, English-as-a-Second Language, Title I, gifted programs, etc.) identification of areas of need, specific skills to improve, strategies that will be implemented (see IHBDA-R), and progress. The Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) and the students progress toward grade-level or proficient performance must be shared with parents/guardians at the parent-teacher conferences that are regularly scheduled. If parents do not attend the scheduled parent-teacher conferences, alternate conference times may be scheduled or the form may be mailed. The principal must review and sign all SAIPs. The SAIP will be used to document parent-teacher conferences. Student Academic Improvement Plans are to be filed in the students permanent record folders at the end of each school year or when the student withdraws from the school. Current services -__IDEA 504 ESL T TITLEI OTHER-Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - Student: ID#: Grade: Teacher: School: Principal: Date developed: ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS __ Developmental Reading Assessment _ ALT Benchmark Exam End-of-Course-______________ AREA OF NEEDS SKILLS TO IMPROVE DATES REVIEWED Date Reviewed by: Results - (AREA) AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER STRATEGIES TO BE USED PROGRESS SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITFCnPY -TFACHFRS WORKING COPY VFI I nW COPY - PARENT r9\u0026gt; mNFFRFNrFt PINK COPY -PAR PNT ir r-riNPPR cNrcr 1 3 LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, September 15, 2000 12:17 PM GLASGOW, DENNIS\nPRICE, PATRICIA\nDAVIS, SUZI SAIP I promised the principals that we would do some sample SAIPs for them. We need to get them to them right away. Please work with your staff to generate a sample for K-2. another for 3-5, then 6-8, and 9-12 in both language arts and mathematics, please. You may need to get access to the book/CD that Gary Smith disseminated so that you will be working with the same resources we asked the schools to use. Each kid does not need a unique SAIP. Teachers can identify kids with similar needs and then duplicate the form for all that set of kids. SAIPs are mandated for kids in grades k-4 who are not performing at grade level, in grade 5 (after grade 4 benchmark), grade 7 (after grade 6 benchmark), grade 9 (after grade 8 benchmark), and high school after the end-of-course tests (whichever grade level is appropriate for individual kids). SAIPs should continue for students who do not reach proficient performance in one year. Please get these samples to me asap. We need toget them out to the schools! Those parent-teacher conferences are already occurring. 1 4 TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 September 15, 2000 All Principals Jt)r. Bonnie Lesley. Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: SAIPsSome Philosophy I Ive been thinking about our discussion about the SAIPs at the Cluster Meeting last week, and I worry that we talked too much about compliance with the law and not enough about the potential benefits to our kids. One of the things, of course, that outrages really fine educators is for legislators and other lay people to micromanage our processes. For SAIPs to be mandated is very similar to the mandate I received last week from my insurance company to take another medication rather than the one prescribed by my doctor. Both actions ARE outrageous! We also resent unfunded and time intensive demands'on usas this new requirement certainly is. So our reactions to this new law should have been totally anticipated. Now the other side: Parents, legislators, and business people also become outraged when we educators fail, in their view, to take the leadership to initiate processes that seem to them to be commonsensical, to be reasonable if we truly want to improve learning. And, indeed, SAIPs are totally reasonable and even reflective of good practice. Think for a moment about the four principles of quality management that we have embraced: customer service, data-driven decisions, continuous learning, and continuous improvement. A good faculty meeting activity might be to reflect together on the ways that SAIPs fit into those four principles. So I invite you to put aside your outrage relating to this new mandate and to think about the ways that you can exploit the mandate and use it as an opportunity to do something good. The SAIP process has the potential to: prevent student failure improve academic performance of individual students improve students self-concept and their perceptions of school and education reduce the dropout rate educate and involve parents provide a focus for professional development I SAIPsSome Philosophy - Memo September 15, 2000 Page Two  improve instructional practices  start a dialogue among teachers on effective interventions  provide a focus for budget prioritization  inform the design of the Title I and School Improvement Plan  create a commitment to develop a SAIP for all students  etc., etc., etc. Now none of these good things will happen if we see the SAIP only as an exercise in paperwork, if we see it as an event that we have to get through and then file the documentation, if we only comply with the letter of the law. I hope you will all use the SAIPs in ways that serve children well, as additional sets of data to guide decision-making in the school, and as opportunities for reflective dialogue with parents and students about improved academic performance. Use them, in other words, as a quality management tool. Please let us know if we can assist you. BAL/adg 5 LL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EARLY CHILDHOOD/ELEMENTARY LITERACY DEPARTMENT 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 Sqjtember 18, 2000 To: Elementary Principals From: Pat Price, Director of Early Childhood/Elementary Literacy Subject: Information regarding SAIP (Student Academic Improvement Plan) for Reading K-5 Please be sure to use the following data when filling out the Assessment Results on the SAIP: Developmental Reading Assessment  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out only for Kindergarten children who are retained. If a student is retained in Kindergarten their score on the Spring DRA should be below a 2.  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any First Grade student who scored below a 2 on the Spring Kindergarten DRA.  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any Second Grade student who scored below a 16 on the Spring First Grade DRA.  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any Third Grade student who scored below a 24 on the Spring Second Grade DRA. Achievement Level Test  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any Fourth Grade student who scored below a 198 RTT score in Reading on the 3\"* Grade Spring ALT.  A Student Academic Improvement Plan (SAIP) should be filled out for any Fifth Grade student who scored below a 205 RTF score in Reading on the 4*** Grade Spring ALT. In addition, any student who scored Basic or Below Basic on the 4* Grade Benchmark Exam in Reading, must have a Student Academic Improvement Plan. Current services -IDEA 504 ESL G/T TITLEI X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan Grade: Kindergarten ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS X Developmentil Reading Assessment _ ALT __ Benchmark Exam End-of-Course________________ AREA OF NEEDS Letter/sound association (AREA) Results\nKindergarten Spring results DRA Level A Recognition of upper and lower case letters Recognizing rhyming words Constructing and writing words Concepts about print STRATEGIES TO BE USED The teacher will model and instruct the student in how to: Hear and record sounds in words through interactive writing Develop concepts about print, letter and Word recognition, and rhyming patterns through shared reading Develop the use of meaning structure and visual cues through shared reading The parent will: Listen to the child read Read to the child Discuss reading and writing assignments with child SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT f WHITE COPY - TEACHER'S WORKING COPY Teacher: Ms. Jones Date developed\n10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE Phonemic awareness Letter recognition Using letter sound knowledge in writing Directionality One - to - one matching Date 10/4/00 10/4/00 DATES REVIEWED Reviewed by\nMs, Jones - Teacher Mrs. Smith - Parent AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER PROGRESS STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2\" CONFERENqE) T PRINCIPAL PINK COPY - PARENT (l\" CONFERENCE) Current services - IDEA 50 ESL G/T TITLEI X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#\n100100 Grade: 1st School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS X Developmental Reading Assessment . ALT __ Benchmark Exam End-of-Course________________ Results: (AREA) Kindergarten Spring results DRA Level A First Grade Fall results DRA Level 1 AREA OF NEEDS Letter/sound association Letter recognition Use of meaning, structure \u0026amp; visual cues in reading. Constructing \u0026amp; writing sentences Teacher\nMs. Jones Date developed: 10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE Independent writing Independent reading Writing vocabulary DATES REVIEWED Date I Reviewed by: 10/4^0 Ms. Jones - Teacher 10/4/00 Mrs. Smith - Parent AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER STRATEGIES TO BE USED PROGRESS The teacher will model and instruct the student in how to: Hear \u0026amp; record sounds in words through interactive writing Use meaning visual and structure cues through guided reading Provide literacy centers to reinforce letter identification, letter sound association and writing vocabulary The parent will: Listen to the child read Read to the child Discuss reading and writing assignments with child SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHER'S WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT t:* CONFERENCE) PINKCOPY -PARNT(lCONFERNCE) Current services - IDEA 504 ESL G/T TITLEI X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 Grade: 2nd School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr, Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS X Devclopmenlil Reading Assessment _ ALT __ Benchmark Exam EDd-or-Courie________________ AREA OF NEEDS Vocabulary (AREA) Spelling pattom Results: Comprehension 1\" grade Spring results DRA Level 12 Spelling \u0026amp; writing development 2\"* grade Fall results DRA Level 14 Use of structure, meaning \u0026amp; visual cues when Reading STRATEGIES TO BE USED The teacher will model and instruct the student in bow to: Use known spelling patterns to spell and read new words Cross check meaning, structure, and visual cues in reading Use the writing process (edit and revise writing) The parent will\nListen to the child read Read to the child Discuss reading and writing assignments with child Teacher: Ms. Jones Date developed: 10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE Independent Writing Independent Reading Reading for Information I Date 10/4/00 10/4/00 DATES REVIEWED Reviewed by: Ms. Jones - Teacher Mrs. Smith - Parent AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER PROGRESS I I SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHER'S WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2\" CONFERENCE) PtNKCOPY . PARENT (I\" CONFERENCE) Current services -IDEA 50 ESL G/T TITLEI X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 Grade: 3\"* Grade School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS X Dcveiopmeotal Readiag Asseumeol _ ALT __ Beacbmark Exam End-of-Courae_____________ AREA OF NEEDS Teacher: Ms. Jones Date developed: 10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE DATES REVIEWED (AREA) Comprehension: Predicting Making inferences Reading for information Reading Comprehension Process Writing Date 10/4/00 Results: Second grade Spring DRA Level 14 Development of Spelling patterns for Reading and Writing Spelling Development Vocabulary Development 10/4/00 Reviewed by: Ms. Jones - Teacher Mrs. Smith - Parent Writing: Revising Editing STRATEGIES TO BE USED AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER PROGRESS The teacher will model and instruct the student in bow to: Use comprehension strategies to make meaning through guided reading, read alouds, and literature circles Use writing process to write narrative and expository texts, expand vocabulary and develop spelling The parent will: Listen to the child read Read to the child Discuss reading and writing assignments with child SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHERS WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2 CONFERENCE) PINK.COPY -PARNT(l^CONFERENCE) I I I Current services -IDEA 504 ESL G/T TITLE I X Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 Grade: 4th Teacher\nMs. Jones School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS __ Developmental Reading Assessment X ALT __ Benchmark Exam Eod'Of'Course_____________ AREA OF NEEDS Reading Comprehension: (AREA) Reading for meaning - fiction and non fiction text Results\nReading nanative and expository Date developed: 10/4/00________ SKILLS TO IMPROVE Reading: Monitor comprehension and use fix up strategies Writing: 10/4/00 10/4/00 DATES REVIEWED I Reviewed by: Ms. Jones - Teach Mrs. Smith - Parent Third Grade Spring results ALT - RIT score 190 Write paragraph with topic sentence supporting details Organize paragraphs to develop cohesive text AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER I pate., STRATEGIES TO BE USED PROGRESS The teacher will model and instruct the student in bow to: Model comprehension strategies through \"think alouds\", self-correct, reread, read on, self question, and summarize Use student conferences to discuss revisions/editing The parent will: Continue to read to and with child Discuss and work with child in various subject areas Encourage child to read-for \" SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHERS WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2* CONFERENCE) PINK COPY - PARENT (1\" CONFERENCE) .a Bnsse-c I Current services -__IDEA Little Rock School District - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year - 2000-2001 Student: Tiffany Smith ID#: 100100 Grade: Sth G/T TITLEI X School: Main Street Elementary Principal: Mr. Morgan ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS __ Developmental Reading Assessment X ALT __ Benchmark Exam End-of-Course_____________ AREA OF NEEDS Reading Comprehension: (AREA) Reading for purpose Results: Use personal background to comprehend 4 th grade Benchmark Exam (ACTAAP) Reading - Below Basic 4'*' grade Spring ALT - RIT score 200 The teacher will: Read functional text Writing: Writing Process STRATEGIES TO BE USED Use activities to establish prior learning/predict new learning Have students read for a variety of purposes Conference student on writing to prompts/using writing process The parent will: Continue to read to and with child Discuss and work with child in various subject areas Encourage child to read-for' SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT Teacher: Ms. Jones Date developed: 10/4/00 SKILLS TO IMPROVE Reading Comprehension: Read and discuss inferential information Evaluate new information by Comparing Writing: Revise and edit writing for . content/mechanics I STUDENT,(IF APPLICABLE) DATES REVIEWED Date 10/4/00 10/4/00 Reviewed by: Ms. Jones - Teacher Mrs. Smith - Parent AT END OF YEAR - FILE IN PERMANENT RECORD FOLDER PROGRESS I I I PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHER'S WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY^.Pjii^^(^ - .ri'\"'* ' 5\" \\ v'jXs 6 LL ft. Secondary English/Foreign Languages Instructional Resource Center 3001 South Pulaski, Little Rock, AR 72206 Phone (501) 324-0510, 324-0513 Fax (501) 324-0504 To: From: Date: All Middle School Principals Suzi Davis September 21, 2000 Attached you will find the sample SAIP form for middle school reading, language arts, writing. Please read below carefully to understand the form and how to fill one out. Assessments Used: 6* grade\n5* grade spring ALT Cut off RIT scores\nReading= 211, Language= 212 7* grade\n6* grade spring ALT Cut off RIT scores: Reading=215, Language-216 6\"' grade spring State Benchmark Test For Basic and Below Basic scores 8* grade: V'*\" grade spring ALT Cut off RIT scores\nReading=220, Language-219 There^^e four areas or goal areas listed by the NWEA for ALT Reading tests, and three ^eas for ALT Language (which include writing skills). Under each of these goal areas are L- -- -------- ________ ran hp. determined which skills in which areas are weak. On the sample, which is a listed several skills. From the report of each child, it can be determined which skills in which areas are . 1 __ til____x1-KAaori' s^ple for reading SAIP only, you will see that in area one. Word Meanings, this student showed weakness skills co A -c were co skills in Uus firs, area wbreh need address.Sl* meanings. In the second area. Interpretive Comprehension, cre were also two remediations needed\none in Snee, and one in authors purpose. A third area and its skill are also listed, but since there is no mention of the fourth area (Literal Comprehension), we know that this child performed satisfactonly m that area and On SAIP, if necessary, a childs language needs and writing needs could be ad^essed. In the future when State Benchmark scores are available, a seventh graders SAIP should also reflect any needs identified by the sixth grade State Benchmark test. Strategies To Be Used: ., , . It has been suggested as a more efficient way of dealmg with this area. that a checklist could be made for skills with the specific needs checked off for each child and this checklist attached to the S^P^It ^uld tSe a team effort to prepare the initial checklist, but after the work is done once it would save time. This SAIP should be available for parent conferences. Progress: This area should reflect data to indicate student is practicing and acquiring skills needed. Notations should be added as the school year progresses. 1 5AmPlc Little Rock School District - Student\nTiffany Smith Cunenl services - _ IDEA 504 ___ESL _ G/T TITLE 1 X OTHER - Academic Improvement Plan for Student - School year ID#: 100100 Grade: 6th -^2000-2001 Teacher\nR. Martin School: Hogwarts Middle School Principal: Dumbledorf Date developed: 10/4/00 ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS Developnieiitl Reading Assessment X ALT Benctiinark Exam End-of-Course _------------------ I area OF NEEDS 1. Word Meanings 1. (AREA) 2. Interpretive Comprehension 2. Results: 3. Evaluative Comprehension SKILLS TO IMPROVE Context Clues Multiple Meanings Inference Authors Purpose Date: 10-1-00 10-1-00 DATES REVIEWED Reviewed by\nR. Martin, teacher B. Spears, parent 5i'* grade Spring ALT Reading RIT - 208 strategies to be USED rVrTviSrpmctke in predicting word meaning and identifying clues in context Provide students with word lists having multiple meanings and practice different context and meanings. . 2. Use short passages to practice inference and drawing conclusions when formation is not given. Teach purposes of literature and provide practice in identifying the purposes in several forms and identifying fact^ias. 3 Teach meaning and purpose c.----------- . Teach meaning of stereotypes and identify examples with studen . The parent will: 1. Read aloud to child and listen to child read aloud, noting words child has 2 child in all subject areas and the meaning of 3. Sse television and magazine advertisements to show bias and purpose of presented 3 material. Encourage the child to read for pleasure! SIGNATURES - TEACHER PARENT 3. Identify bias, stereotypes PROGRESS STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL WHITE COPY - TEACHERS WORKING COPY YELLOW COPY - PARENT (2\" CONFERENCE) PINK COPY - PARENT (1^^ CONFERENCE) ] Little Rock Public Schools Reading Achievement Level Test Goals 1. Word Meaning a. b. c. d. e. Phonetic skills Context clues Synonyms, antonyms, homonyms Component structure (prefix, suffix, origin, roots Multiple meanings 2. Literal Comprehension a. Recall/identify significant details b. c. d. e. Identify main idea Locate information Follow directions Sequence details 3. Interpretive Comprehension a. b. c. d. e. f. Inference Identify cause and effect Authors purpose Prediction Summarize Identify literary elements (character, plot, setting, theme, etc.) 4. Evaluative Comprehension a. b. c. d. e. Evaluate conclusions, validity (supporting context) Identify fact and opinion Identify literary techniques (figurative language, mood, tone, etc.) Distinguish text forms Identify bias, stereotypes Little Rock School District Language Usage Achievement Level Test Goals 1. Writing Process a. Prewriting skills b. c. d. e. f. Drafting and revising Editing/proofreading Choosing appropriate format Sentence choice appropriate to purpose Paragraph skills (topic and concluding sentences, indenting, etc.) 2. Grammar and Usage a. b. c. d. e. f. g-h. i. Sentence patterns Phrases and clauses Noun forms Verb usage: tenses, irregular verbs, subject-verb agreement Adjective forms Adverb forms Pronoun forms Pronoun antecedent agreement Negative forms 3. Mechanics a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. End punctuation Commas Apostrophes Enclosing punctuation Titles Beginning Capitalization Proper nouns and adjectives Capital I I ! I 7I LL Secondary English, Foreign Languages I I f 5 Memo To: From\nCC\nDate: Re: Middle School Principals ^Suzi Davis September 26,2000 Parent Conferences for SAIP Attached you will find a copy of the information regarding use of the SAIP form for parent conferencing. Please note the part about mailing home the SAIP if the parent is unable to attend a conference or sign the form. I thought the information included in this page was important and might be helpful to you. Please let me know if there is more that you need.  Page 1**4 , Ji / background - Act 999 of 1999 requires LRSD to develop a Student Academic ImnrtJ^lTpian for students not performing on grade level (K-4), not proficient ow XXXark (primary, intermediate, middle), ^d students ~ proficient on Cv XiXA*** J ) 7 f' Al K End-of-Course exams in Literacy, Geometry, Algebra PROCESS, PROCEDURE, AND FORM - DRAFT A Student Achievement Improvement Plan will be developed/revised for students who are not proficient according to the results of\n. Observation Surveys (Grades K-Z\"-*) conducted in September and April, . Achievement Level Tests (Grades 3\"*-11*) conducted m August/September and . EnTo^f Course Exams (Algebra I, Geometry, Literacy) conducted in May, and _1_______1, i-n AAoV th 4' Quarter Benchmark Exams (3'^ -8') in May. The SAIP will document the consideration of cutreut personalized services (apecial Xato English as a Second Language, Title I, Gifted programs etc.) f areas of need, specific skills to improve, strategies that will be implemented. progress. The SAIP conferences in will be reviewed/revised with parents at scheduled in the Fall and Spring. The parent, teacher, and student (if applicable) will ies for the home and school, and discuss which area of needs will be addressed, sriategies The principal, or desi^ee will review and si^ dl  P review progress. . _ are unable to attend the Parent Teacher Conference, a copy of the SAIP will be mailed to them. X form is to be used in heu of current Parent Teacher Conference form. The SAIP will be kept in the classroom during the school year as a working copy for the Al_ _ 0 A IIJ teacher. At the end of the school year. or if the student exits the school, the SAIP would SS iXXts permaneni record folder for review by fiiture teachers. ) I I Snecific strategies will be developed by the teacher, parent, and student (if applicable). IrXST^tegiescancom^ftomavari^ofs^^^^ knowledge and experience, student team meetmgs, or r.  sessions. Some of the sources recommended are\nschool generated problem-solving . The Pre-Referral Intervention Manual by McCamey, Wunderlich \u0026amp; Bauer Second Edition, (see attached cover, index, and sample page) Cost - $36.00 Manual, $190.00 Computer version. District created interactive WEB site for posting and locating strategies that can  S XsXstatf members. This would neeb to be developed. Cost unknown. . Imbed into all curricular suff development training specific strategies to address areas of need that are assessed. 1 s8 TO. FROM. LL little rock school district INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 September 27, 2000 middle school PRINCIPALS I^ENNIS GLASGOW. DIRECTOR OF MATH AND SCIENCE SUBJECT: SAIP Form The SAIP form for middle school mathematics will follow the same format as the iwuauw Tii\u0026gt; will find the sample SAIP form for middle readinq/language arts. Attached you will find the samples oMir ____and the areas and skills listed for the ALT. school mathematics and the areas Below you will find the cut off RIT scores for mathematics\n1 I 6' grade\n7 grade\ns grade\n5\"* grade spring ALT 6* grade spring ALT 7 grade spring ALT Cut off RIT scores\nMath = 215 Cut off RIT scores\nMath = 220 Cut off RIT scores\nMath = 227 I) Little Rock School District Mathematics Achievement Level Test Goals 1. Operations a. Whole number computation b. Fraction, decimal, mixed number percents computation c. Computation with positive and negative numbers d. Estimation and rounding e. Applications 2. Number Sense and Properties a. Identify numerical patterns b. Counting and recognition, odd-even, grouping c. Place value, expanded notation d. Powers of ten, factoring, prime numbers, multiples e. Exponents, squares, scientific notation, roots f. Whole and fractional concepts g. Number lines, coordinate graphs h. Applications I 3. Geometry and Spatial Sense i S Identify, describe, classify shapes, figures, and objects b. Classify and measure angles and triangles, Pythagorean Theorem c. Line segments, lines, rays, relationships (perpendicular, parallel, intersecting, etc.) d. Congruence, symmetry, translations (flips, slides, rotations) a. e. Circles (circumference, diameter, radius) f. Coordinates, ordered pairs O' Applications 4. Measurement I I a. b. Linear measurement Measure/estimate perimeter, area, mass, volume in standard and non-standard measures c. Time, rate, speed, ratio, scale d. Weight, temperature e. Units of money f. Conversion within a system g- Compare or convert between systems h. Applications 5. Data Analysis, Statistics, and Probability a. Analyze, interpret data displays b. Probability and prediction c. Measures of central tendency and distribution d. Applications 6. Patterns, Algebra and Functions Equations, variables, expressions b. Equalities and inequalities (=,\u0026gt;,\u0026lt;) a. c. Patterns and functions d. Applications Current services -__IDEA  504 ------ U/l iiiLbi AuinnK.- Little Rock School District - Grad^*^**^h Teacher\nR. Martin Student\nTiffany Smith ED #\n100100 School: Hogwarts Middle School Principal: Dumbledorf Date developed\n10/4/00 ASSESSMENT/ RESULTS _ DevetopmenUl Rudins Asseument X ALT __ Benchmark Eim End-of-Coune________________ /JtEA OF NEEDS SKBXS TO IMPROVE ni\\TES reviewed (AREA) I, Operations 2. Number Sense and Properties 1. Whole number computation Estimation and rounding Date\nReviewed by: Results\n3. Geometry and Spatial Sense 2. Identify numerical patterns Whole and fractional concepts 10-1- 00 10 -1-00 R. Martin, teacher R. Snears, parent 5i'* grade Spring ATT Mathematics RIT - 3. Circles (circumference, diameter, radius) 208 STRATEGIES TO BE USED ^ctiK in whole number computation using a variety of resources including practice sheets, games and computer software^ resources including 2 Provide pracUce in estimation and rounding usmg a variety reso practice s.h eets, gam__e_s_ _a_n_d1 computer CsAoffttwwfalTreC. 3 Develop alternative algorithms for computation. 4 5. Use concrete activities to attributes of circles. and progress The parent will\n1. Practice computation. 2. Discuss material read with child in in mathematics and the meaning of material. 3. 4. Provide opportunities to Use television and magazine advertisements to estimation skills (i.c.. shopping) ..ccH in show mathematical concepts used in real life. Encourage the child to have a positive attitude about problem solving! SIGNATURES - TEACHER parent STUDENT (IF APPLICABLE) PRINCIPAL TC acmpdo tvAoviKin rODV VT?T T rk/ /^ov DA Dwxrr r-** Drxtv rnDV DA D cxrr dp 9LESLEY, BONNIE From: lent: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, September 27, 2000 6:28 PM CARTER, LILLIE RE: SAIP Thanks so much for this nice feedback, Lillie. And thanks for being our victim principal today. You're a great sport. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: CARTER\u0026gt;ltriE ) Thursd^September 21, 2000, LESLEvSOMMlS------ SAIP If52 PM Dr. Lesley, I just finished reading this week's Learning Links. Thank you so much for sharing your philosophy and for sending sample copies of the SAIP. Many years ago, we had to write a plan for students who did not pass the Arkansas M.P.T. (Minimum Performance Test). I know that you are very busy. I just wanted you to know how much I appreciate what you do for our district on a daily basis. This will be shared with my staff during grade-level meetings on Monday and Tuesday of next week. Lillie Carter 1 10 LESLEY, BONNIE From: bSent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY. BONNIE Wednesday, September 27, 2000 6:22 PM COX, ELEANOR PRICE. PATRICIA RE: SAIP'S Thanks so much for this feedback, Eleanor. I will pass it along to Pat as well. We appreciate your taking the time. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: cox, ELEANOR Friday, September 22, 2000 3:11 PM LESLEY, BONNIE SAIP'S I really appreciate your comments in the \"Learning Links\" regarding the SAIP mandate. I do not understand all the complaints or \"disasterizing\" as I call it. This is not anything new. The incentive schools have done this for years. I initiated a practice similar to this at every school I have been principal except Baseline. It does work and helps to keep teachers focused on what needs to be taught and how to use the benchmarks to accomplish these goals. I personally am thrilled about the process, and like you, outraged with the mandate. But, we ae living in different times and we have to go with the flow or find employment elsewhere. Tell Pat thanks for the examples of the SAIP's. Good move for us visual learner (Smile). 1 11LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent\nTo: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, September 29, 2000 12:43 PM DAVIS, SUZI RE: More SAIP help I'm free now. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: DAVIS, SUZI Friday, September 29, 2000 11:25 AM LESLEY, BONNIE FW: More SAIP help Maybe this has calmed the storm a little bit for Nancy. We have talked and I will go there next week and get them on task with SAIP. The testing problem I cannot help with much, but I perhaps can give them something. Meantime, I will be here all day as Jim Fullerton has moved me to Monday. So let me know when we can visit. Especially before you get out of here. Who is going with you to see \"Grapes\"? Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: ROUSSEAU, NANCY Friday, September 29, 2000 10:59 AM DAVIS, SUZI RE: More SAIP help I am copying this and distributing it to all of my wonderful English teachers. Thank you, Suzi, for all that you do for the LRSD and my English teachers. You are a most competent, wonderful professional. We thank you here at PHMS -  -----Original Message----- From: DAVIS, SUZI Sent: To: Friday, September 29, 2000 9:43 AM BUCK, LARRY\nBLAYLOCK, ANN\nFULLERTON, JIM\nMOSBY, JIMMY\nBERRY, DEBORAH\nPATTERSON, DAVID\nROUSSEAU, NANCY\nHUDSON, ELOUISE Subject: More SAIP help I will send you by email later this morning a checklist with strategies listed for ail the areas of the ALT tests, reading and language, that teachers can simply check the ones that apply to each student not proficient, and then staple to the SAIP form. It should make teachers' lives quite a bit simpler when filling these things out. I know it won't be a perfect list of strategies, but I wanted to do something to help as soon as possible. Look for it later this morning. 1 12 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 April 3, 2001 TO: FROM: Pat Price Pat Busbea Dr. Ed Williams ^r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: DRA Please read the attached document carefully. Think about our own procedures, levels of readiness, SAIP requirements, etc. Lets meet to discuss Friday, April 6, at 1:30 in my office. Thanks! I BAL/adg Attachments I Connecticut State Department of Education An Act Concerning Educational Accountability Q\u0026amp;A  Use of the Developmental Reading Assessment  All Students Grades 1-3  Special Education Students  Bilingual Education Students  Additional Support for 4^*\" Grade Students Scoring Below Intervention Level on CMT 1. How is the DRA used to meet the requirements of Public Act 99-288, An Act Concerning Educational Accountability? Public Act 99-288, An Act Concerning Educational Accountability, states that for each school year commencing on or after July 1, 1999, each local and regional board of education for a priority school district shall require the schools under its jurisdiction to evaluate the reading level of students enrolled in grades one through three, inclusive, in the middle of the school year and at the end of the school year. The legislation further states, a student shall be determined to be substantially deficient in reading based on measures set by the State Board of Education.\" On 12/1/99 the State Board of Education adopted the Developmental Reading Assessment [DRA] as the approved standardized assessment for identifying which students are substantially deficient in reading and in need of additional support for students in grades 1-3. 2. When mu^ the DRA be given as required by state legislation and which texts should be used for the assessment? To fulfill the legislative requirement the state-approved DRA must be administered twice a year to all students in grades 1-3. Based on previous assessments and the judgment of the teacher, the appropriate level text should be used for the assessment. If the student has met the standard on the state identified text or on texts beyond that level, the student will not be identified as substantially deficient in reading. If the student is not able to meet the standard on the state identified text or they can only be assessed on texts below the state identified text, they would be identified as substantially deficient in reading. 1Mid-year, priority school districts must select a four-week period in January-February in which to do the testing. At the end of the year, priority school districts must test during the last week in April and the first three weeks of May. 3. What are the levels at which a student will be considered substantially deficient? The following table provides the DRA substantially deficient standard level information. In order for a student to be considered beyond the substantially deficient level, s/he would have to achieve both of the following standards:  The student would have to read the appropriate text with 95%-100% accuracy\nand  The student would have to receive a score of 3 or 4 on a 4-point rubric assessing the student's ability to comprehend and retell a story Grade Level 1 Mid-Year Level Level 6 Why Are We Stopping Level 14 The Wagon End of Year Level Level 10 Shoe Boxes\" Level 16 The Pot of Gold\" Level 20 \u0026lt;Green Freddie\" Level 24 The Wonderful Day 2 3 4. How often can the DRA be used to assess students? The use of the DRA Kit should be limited for use in classrooms for the following-reasons\n to determine base-line reading levels\n for new students\n for mid-year and end-of-the year state-mandated assessments\nand  to determine a satisfactory level of progress in reading for students for whom a reading intervention has been provided. The state-approved DRA should not be used to practice for future state-mandated assessments. District and school personnel are responsible to ensure that appropriate materials are provided for classroom teachers to continue on-going assessments throughout the school year. Alternate titles have been developed by the publisher of the Developmental Reading Assessment and may be used for on-going assessments. However, these alternate DRA texts at the substantially deficient standard\" levels are not to be used for the state-mandated formal assessment at mid-year or at the end-of-the year. 2 The Developmental Reading Assessment was intended for use with students in grades K-3. It may also be used appropriately to assess students who are performing below expected reading levels in fourth grade. Assessments using the DRA should not take place with more frequency than a six-week interval. The state approved DRA should be used only for the purposes addressed in paragraph 1. Efforts should be made to keep the state approved DRA in a central location in the school and available to classroom teachers and personnel as needed for those stated purposes. 5. What services are required to be provided if a student scores below the substantially deficient level on the state approved DRA? The legislation requires that if a student is found to be substantially deficient in reading based on: 1. 2. 6. the middle of the year evaluation  the school shall notify the parents or guardians of the student of such result.\" 'A District and school personnel should develop a letter to inform the students family about the students performance including the schools plan(s) for intervention and suggestions on what the family could do to assist the child Additionally we recommend that districts should: Develop a personal (individual) reading plan that outlines additional instructional support and monitors student progress. This instructional support may include but not necessarily be limited to tutoring, after school support, Saturday Academies as well as explicit instruction in small-groups. the end of the year evaluation  the school shall develop a personal reading plan for each student. The personal reading plan shall include measures to improve the students reading level, such as tutoring, a transitional class, or a summer reading program ... and shall be maintained until the student achieves a satisfactory level of progress. If a student scores at or above the substantially deficient level does that mean the student is a competent independent reader? No. If the student has scored at the substantially deficient level, the student still requires a great deal of instruction to become a competent independent reader. The score only implies that the student needs intervention in reading. 7. Will bilingual students be assessed using the state approved DRA? I Yes. The legislation states that all students in the priority school districts in grades one through three, inclusive, must be assessed. This has been interpreted to mean that students in bilingual prograrhs will be assessed for their ability to read in English, as measured by the state approved DRA. Only after the English version of the state-approved DRA has been administered, the 3 Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE) recommends that Spanish speaking students in bilingual programs be assessed for their ability to read and comprehend in Spanish using the Spanish version of the DRA, Evaluacidn del Desarrollo de la Lecture (EDL). The use of the EDL will allow teachers of bilingual students to plan instruction based on ongoing assessment. 8. How is the DRA also used to fulfill the P.A. 99-211, An Act Improving Bilingual Education, requirement for the annual assessment of academic progress for students in bilingual programs? To be eligible to exit a bilingual program or stop receiving bilingual support, a student in Grades K, 1,2 and 3 must meet the grade level standard on the DRA, in addition to meeting a linguistic standard (third grade students also have to score above the inten/ention level on the CMT). DRA Grade Level Standard K 1 2 3 Level 2 Level 16 Level 28 Level 38 I Can See The Pot of Gold You Dont Look Beautiful to Me Trouble at the Beaver Pond 9. When is the DRA administered to meet the requirements to annually assess students In bilingual programs? The results of the spring DRA assessment (last week in April through third week in May) can also be used to fulfill the assessment requirements for bilingual students. 10. If a student in a bilingual program is identified as substantially deficient in reading and the individual reading plan identifies the need for summer school, must the summer school instruction be provided in the students native language? Yes, if the individual reading plan indicates the need for continued literacy development in the students native language. 11. What is the districts obligation to include measures to improve special education students reading level, such as tutoring, transitional classes, after school and summer school when the student scores below the substantially deficient level? 4The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that public agencies ...ensure that its children with disabilities have available to them the variety of educational programs and services available to non-disabled children in the area served by the agency... As such special education students who are substantially deficient on the state approved DRA must have the same access to measures to improve student learning as regular education students who also scored in the substantially-deficient range. 12.Will students in special education be assessed using the state approved DRA? Yes. ALL special education students in an academic program (1-3) should be assessed with all other students, and if they are not making sufficient progress towards learning to read they should have access to the extra help provided. As such, only severely cognitively impaired students in grades 1-3 who are participating in a functionally based program, which does not include reading should not participate. The Individual Educational Plans (lEPs) of students in this latter group should reflect how they would be assessed on appropriate developmental communication skills. Students who have not been tested using the state approved DRA should not be included in the number of students who are found to be substantially deficient in reading. 13. Do special education students with lEPs need a Personai/lndividual Reading Plan? Yes, every student who has been identified as substantially deficient\" on the state-approved DRA must have a Personai/lndividual Reading Plan. School teams should review the lEPs of special education students who score in the substantially deficient range on the state-approved DRA. Appropriate components of the lEP may be copied and included in the students Personai/lndividual Reading Plan to ensure that the student has a comprehensive and coordinated reading program, with appropriate interventions in place. 14. Who should administer the state-approved DRA7 The classroom teacher is responsible for the administration of the state-approved DRA to all regular education students and bilingual education students. In the case of special education students, the teacher who has primary responsibility for planning and implementing the reading instruction program should administer the state-approved DRA. 5 15. What is the official state-approved DRA retelling rubric and what are the directions? DRA Retelling Rubric Teacher: start at the beginning and tell me in your own words what happened in the story. Teachier may add (ohl^ once)\nTell me more. Important note: No other prompts (questions) may be given to the student prior to scoring the students retelling. Assessors notes should reflect what the child tells the teacher. The assessor should use the story overview to underline phrases and words and to write pertinent words and phrases that the student uses- JPASS (score 3 or 4) ir' . . .\u0026lt;  -  U'.f i.'.zyrv,. V?, h. 4 Retelling reflects very good comprehension:  Captures the essence of the story or information  Sequential: includes important events/facts  Includes important information about the characters and setting  Refers to characters and places by name  Reveals use of background knowledge to interpret 3 Retelling reflects adequate comprehension:  Relates the gist of the story or information  Sequential for the most part: 1 or 2 events/facts may be omitted  Includes some information about the characters and setting  Refers to most characters by name  Literal interpretation FAIL? (score 2 or 1)1. w 2 Retelling reflects some comprehension:  Relates pieces of the story or information  Some events/facts omitted or out of sequence  Mentions most of the characters  Refers to 1 or 2 characters by name  Some misinterpretation 1 Retelling reflects very little comprehension:  Focuses on a limited part of the story or information  Only 1 or 2 events/facts mentioned  Some characters omitted  Refers to characters in common terms (boy, girl, dog, he, she)  Misinterpretation or incorrect information 16. Will the current state-approved rubric and standards be revised as a result of changes in Joetta Beavers newly published DRA? 6 After two years of use, we will re-examine the standards in light of our state results and in light of Joetta Beaver's changes. For the 2000-2001 academic year, these will be NO CHANGES. 17. What are the requirements for providing additional instruction to students in priority school districts who scored below the intervention level on the 4**^ grade CMT tests during the 2000-2001 school year? According to PA 99-288, the additional instruction should be geared to addressing the students' deficiencies and may include tutoring, after school or school vacation programs or weekend school programs. The additional instruction should be provided as soon as possible after the CMT student results are released. The Principal may waive the additional instruction based on the recommendation of the classroom teacher with documentation that the student has demonstrated significant growth in the subject tested and would not benefit from additional instruction. 18. If students scored below the intervention (remedial) level on more than one test, what is the priority for providing additional instruction? Since this is the first year of the requirement, priority should be given to providing additional instruction to students during the school year who scored below the intervention level in reading. If resources are available within the district, a comprehensive program of additional instruction should be provided to students who scored below the intervention level in writing and/or mathematics. 19. What are the summer school requirements for 4'* grade students in priority school districts who scored below the intervention level on the 4**^ grade CMT tests during the 2000-2001 school year? Again, priority should be given to students who scored below the intervention level in reading. These students are expected to attend summer school unless they are exempt by the Superintendent. Exemption from summer school may mean that there is supporting evidence to indicate that a student is performing above the intervention level. Decisions for exempting students from summer school should be made using only standardized procedures and assessment data established at the district level. It is recommended that additional student assessment data to document that progress in reading be obtained through the use of the school secure Reading Comprehension test of the CMT, the DRP, Level 40 {Old Ben Bailey Meets His Match) of the state approved DRA, local district assessments or other standardized reading tests. 20. What if summer school is offered to those students in priority school districts for whom an exemption is not recommended and they do not attend summer school? I Any student who scored below the intervention level on the reading 4* grade CMT in 2000-2001, who was not exempt from summer school and did not attend, shall not be promoted to 5'* grade. 7Where do I have information or questions answered? Name Organization Phone No. DRA Questions Linda Kauffmann CSDE 860-566-3135 Office of Priority Schools/ Implementation of DRA Barbara Beaudin CSDE 860-566-4306 DRA and accountability evaluation model Kristina Eiias^taron CSDE 860-566-1103 LA Consultant/Curriculum questions Nancy Stark CSDE 860-804-2021 Special Ed LA Consultant/Speciai Ed curriculum questions John Frolich Celebration Press/Pearson Learning 914-925-0346 FAX 914-925-0347 vm\n800-435-3499 ext. 12021 Ordering Information H:\\DRA MemostDRA - Q and A Revisions 01 -09-01 .doc 8 Curriculum Mapping (Examples) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Dec. 3, 1998, with agenda for Dec. 9 meeting\nincludes reports on District-Level Curriculum Maps 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 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 Memorandum in Nov. 9, 1999, Learning Links providing information on curriculum mapping with attached article Memorandum in Nov. 17, 1999, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping training Memorandum in Dec. 1,1999, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping Memorandum in Jan. 12, 2000, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping 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 Memorandum in Jan. 19, 2000, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping 10. Memorandum in Feb. 16, 2000, Learning Links to selected principals establishing training schedule for curriculum mapping 11. E-mail, Feb. 15-17, 2000, relating to training for curriculum mapping trainers 12. Memorandum in Apr. 5, 2000, Learning Links to Brokers and IRC Specialists establishing training schedule on curriculum mapping 13. E-mail to Mona Briggs and Marion Woods, Apr. 14, 2000, relating to additional curriculum mapping training 14. E-mail, Apr. 26-May 2, 2000, relating to plans for curriculum mapping 15. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 6, 2000, with information on curriculum mapping16. E-mail to Bonnie Lesley, June 6, 2000, relating to results of curriculum mapping training LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 December 3,1998 TO\nDennis Glasgow Judy Teeter Marie McNeal Marion Woods Patty Kohler Dr. Kathy Lease Marion Baldwin Linda Young Debbie Milam Lucy Lyon Leon Adams Carol Green Catherine Gill Marian Shead-Jackson Pat Price Ann Freeman Vanessa Cleaver Paulette Martin FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: December 9 Division Meeting Please be reminded of our Division meeting on Wednesday, December 9, 9:00 - noon. Room 19 here at the IRC. Our tentative agenda follows: 1. Opening Remarks and Announcements Bonnie Lesley 2. Report on Status of CRTs Kathy Lease 3. Brief Reports on Status of Curriculum Maps, K-4 4. Smart Start Data Analysis Dennis Glasgow Marie McNeal Judy Teeter Pat Price Ann Freeman Please invite those members of your departments who should attend. BAL/adg LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 July 16, 1999 TO: Mona Briggs FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley,, AAssssociate Superintendent, for Instruction SUBJECT: Curriculum Mapping Attached is a copy of the training notebook that someone picked up for me at last summers training on Curriculum Mapping. Gene Parker has one. I am also attaching a copy of a newsletter article. Id like you and Gene Parker to collaborate on putting together a training package on Curriculum Mapping for, first. Division staff and other Brokers\nfor principals\nand then perhaps a plan to train someone else at each school. I think we should leverage and exploit this new ACSIP expectation to take us to the next step of standards implementation. Lets meet to discuss - you. Gene, and me, on Tuesday, August 10, at 9:00, in Room 19. Attachments BAL/rcm cc: Kathy Lease Gene Parker LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501)324-2131 August 30, 1999 TO: Kathy Lease Mona Briggs Eddie McCoy Ed Williams Yvette Dillingham Marion Woods Patty Kohler Diane Rynders Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Mable Donaldson Pat Price Marie McNeal Carol Green Sue Walls Pam Crawford Linda Austin Debbie Milam Paulette Martin Marion Baldwin Lucy Neal Selma Hobby Leon Adams Marian S. Jackson FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesle' .ssociate Superintendent, for Instruction SUBJECT: September 1 Division Meeting I am looking forward to seeing you at the Sept.1 Division meeting - 9:00 am until Noon in Room 19 here at the IRC. Our tentative agenda is attached. Please let me know if there are topics or action items you would like to add. Attachment BAL/rcm Agenda, Division of Instruction September 1,1999 Discussion: 1999-2000 Work Plan Priorities Team Leaders Discussion and Reading Assignment Why Teams? Roles of Work Teams in School Improvement What Is Our Portfolio of Services? Guidelines for School Improvement Planning Discussion: Curriculmn Mapping Project ACC Curriculum/Assessment Professional DevelopmentScheduling Miscellaneous Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley Mona Briggs Eddie McCoy Carol Green Kathy Lease Marion Woods All LL \"/\"l/H 7 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 November 4, 1999 I TO: FROM\nEveryone Dr. Bonnie LesleyrA^ociate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nCurriculum Mapping I I The ACSIP process requires you to do curriculum mapping. A better reason is that it is a process that ensures that every teacher is aligning his/her lessons with the Curriculum Standards. It's a wonderful professional development actively, and it will move your school forward in being successful. Attached is an article that will be helpful. For more information, study Heidi Hayes Jacobs' book. Mapping the Big Picture. For even more information, call Mona Briggs or Eddie McCoy, 324-2120. I 1 1! Attachment BAL/rcm \u0026gt;1 / I { I -A 2 Lessons Learned from Curriculum Mapping By Charlotte Vlases aToya is excited. Her Sth grade class is planning a field trip to Chickamauga ___Battlefield, a local site made famous during the Civil War. LaToya had a great time when her 4th grade class toured the museum last yearshe even v/rote a paper on her visit. This year, she thinks, itll be a breeze. Theres no way shes going to tell her teacher shes been there beforeLaToya has always appreciated L an easy A.. Many teachers can see a truth reflected in the fictitious scenario above: That although we try to give our students rich learning activities, we sometimes forget that we re building on a childs entire educational experience. What happens, then, is that students like LaToya arent really challenged and dont really deepen their understanding. She may indeed have fun on that field trip. But how did her teacher make sure the trip was as intellectually rigorous as it was enjoyable? How did the teacher extend what LaToya learned during her earlier visit to Chickamauga Battlefield? Here at the Chattanooga School for the Liberal Arts (CSLA) in Chattanooga, Tenn., weve found a way to eliminate such repetitions, as well as gaps, in our curriculum. We map our curriculum so all of our teachers know what we want our students to learn, what they have learned in the past, and what theyll learn in the next gradeand beyond. Just as a road map shows where you are. the teachers within a grade level compared maps and together developed a map that represented the curriculum taught at that grade. These maps were first handwritten on large sheets of paper and posted on a wall in the office, where they remained for all teachers at every grade level to review before any changes were made. As we examined the maps, we began to see where repetitions and gaps occurred in the curriculum. Working together, we started making revisions that would ensure a logical and meaningful curriculum for all of our students. We have changed the maps several times and continue to refine them by adding essential questions, assessments, and lists of the precise skills we want students to acquire. Computer technology has made creating and revising where you've been, and where you are going, a curriculum map. gives the. sam. e information about what is occurring in a classroom, in a school, and in schools throughout a district. A Brief History of Mapping at CSLA Former principal Mary Ann Holt brought the idea of curriculum mapping to CSLA fac-ulty after reading articles by Heidi Hayes Jacobs, author of the 1997 ASCD book Mapping the Big Picture. Holt also attended workshops presented by Jacobs and was convinced that most teachers would find curriculum mapping to be a logical way to see exactly what would be taught each year within our building. What Teachers Say /Curriculum mappin gtakes time, effort.and .a wtaessTo / work witb coheagues to rret\u0026amp;finiee tteeaacchhjinngg^ ppllamnSs.\nSSttiiUll,, .mmaaktiongg: fect.sehse to teachers. Tliey sayitbest: i'After having sperrt raanyhours trymglo rnd^i^ani^a curricuhimsfit theneedsof my:swdents,\nthe.idea,^^^^ .mappingwas^i*m...e.diately, appe^, g-t p-. me\n. 1 , S -. thinkhawiig time to refledbiWhe raaps-vatli^Q^.^\u0026amp;i sw leaguesiisveiy inipoTtanTitp?y^^:^^^y^^?^' 1^\n^'bwnrnapjbml c^genera]yibimt.\u0026amp;  nevvideatobe'-sparked by^ne of m'ypeers dtmng a ..  reflection session: :..v' '7\n, ' - .f-'-^enni^H\u0026lt;mtkih,a}Tnputertec^ ?}: Curriculum inapping helps me -visualize what s bemg ,  taught , ASancy Huston^ foreign'Janguage Tt immediately rn^e sense fb me, because of how it . looks at chiidreris overall irarnmg frbm year to year, 5\" ^dbecauM ofhbwit'cqririders eachteacher and each p\u0026gt;-\ngrade as'a^tal part of an.overall lemfeg process.  _ : 7\nRobert\nV \\ It helps me focus on the objectives I want to teach. maps manageable. By keeping the maps on a database, teachers can easily share and review one anothers documents. At CSLA, our computer technology teacher created map templates for each teacher, making it simple for them to create, revise, and store the curriculum maps. cisms of their teaching plans personaUy. Everyone must be willing to work together. Teachers should never feel intimidated or judged. They must have the freedom to be completely honest when creating their first map so that it truly reflects the operational curriculum. If teachers describe their teach-ing the way they think it should be instead of Lesson Learned: A Collegial Environment Is Key Curriculum mapping isnt easy. Its time consuming and cannot be done alone. Teachers may naturally feel possessive of the units and the curriculum they have developed and perhaps taught for years. It can be difficult when a colleague suggests that a teacher give up a cherished piece of literature or a favorite activity so that someone else can use it. But those are the types of discussions that have to take place and the types of changes that have to occur to successfully implement curriculum mapping. To create a schoolwide curriculum that truly is best for students, teachers have to feel free to express themselves and not take criti-the way it actually is, then the maps will be flawed, and any revisions will be false. At CSLA, we always start the school year with a team-building activity that is fun, and not related to academics. This gives teachers opportunities to get to know one another outsidethe school setting. For example, one school year began with a white-water rafting adventure. Another year we tried a ropes course at a survival camp. The next fall we were sent on a scavenger hunt all around town, using only public transportation. Ismahen Kangles, our current principal, continued the tradition by taking the faculty to a secluded mountain cabin for some reflection time, followed by an outdoor ed a calendar-based map by listing the units lunch at a riverside restaurant. Such activities taught each month of the school year. Then We began slowly. First, each teacher creat 3 set the tone for the kind of camaraderie that must exist before the real work begins and continues. i r Lesson Learned: Support from Administrators Is ^sential To sustain a curriculum mapping approach, teachers must hear from those colleagues who have been there and are willing to share their experiences and results. Creating and refining the maps is a collaborative process that takes a substantial amount of time. Savvy administrators make sure teachers have that time. Here at CSLA, our principal devotes two faculty meetings each month to curriculum mapping work. According to Kangles, teachers need to be given time to revisit and revise their maps if they are to take an active role in bringing about curriculum mapping within their building. Training and time are important elements that an administrator provides, but equally important is the clear expectation set by the principalthat mapping willhe done. Both Holt and Kangles set deadlines for the completion of maps. When the principal sets the expectation that work will be accomplished by a specific date and then offers support, teachers get the message that mapping is a top priority and something that must be done. ! i f Personal Reflections The teachers at CSLA have accomplished a great deal in a fairly short amount of time. We began curriculum mapping with the support of knowledgeable administrators who shared a 'vision. We are committed to curriculum mapping because we are willing to do whatever it takes to create the best learning experience for our students, juh No More First-Year Jitters Preparing teachers for a successful first year of teaching sometimes seems a near-impossible task. Trying to bridge the gap between good theories in college and successful practices in the classroom is a complicated and enormous responsibility for first-year teachers. A new publication written by Amy DePaul and available from the U.S. Department of Education may be just the tool se/o\\nm-/e tttefaacrhrieprrsc nnpepeHd tton nnnott oAnnl Vy ssuurrvviivvee' but also succeed in their first year. Entitled What to Expect Your First Year of Teaching, the book is a compilation of first-year teachers responses to questions about their first year of teaching. Among the issues the book addresses is What Colleges and Universities Should Know. This chapter includes teachers comments about how their education prepared or failed to prepare them for classroom experiences. Many of the respondents stated that they lacked adequate computer training and that they could have benefitted from spending more time in real classrooms and learning more about social problems affecting young people today. These observations relate directly to teachers suggestions on how colleges and universities could improve their education programs. Top among the-suggestions\n Require student teachers to complete an internship at a crisis center to get experience with kids with social issues. The Wisdom of Experience  Help student teachers make connections with students and faculty in local districts so they can connect what theyre learning to the reality of the K-12 school setting.  Create mentoring programs so first-year teachers can share experiences and work with veteran teachers. The teachers who contributed to 'What to Expect Your First Year of Teaching also acknowledged that there were some experiences for which no college or university understanding the absolute commitment they must make to students. Respondents also felt that no teacher preparation program can adequately deal with the real-world challenges of social issues like gangs, violence, and abuse and the need to fill the many demanding roles of a teacher. The teachers whose responses are included in What to Expect were winners of the First Class Teacher Award, an award that honors the nations outstanding elementary and secondary first-year teachers. Other topics in the book include tips on having a successful first year, advice from veteran teachers on being a successful teacher, and what principals and administrators can do to help first-year teachers. H Laura Kelly Editors Note: The entire text 0/What to Expect Your First Year of Teaching is available on the Web at \u0026lt;.http:/fwww.ed .gov/pubs/FirstYear\u0026gt;. 5'S Editor's Note: Charlotte Vlasis is the library media specialist at the Chattanooga School for the Liberal Arts. As media specialist, I am a resource person. But I also serve as a curriculum coordinator because I plan with all teachers and work with everyones maps, she says. SiA\nAwar^winningveteriiteathershave supplied a set oftips to p^s on to their .first-year colleagues.\nMai^ of these suggestiqiw^etips that all teachers would be. advisedto'fbliow. Heres a sampling: It's Vlasis'job to always have the big picture'' perspective, so it's also her responsibility to let teachers know when they're stepping on one another's toes. A lot of times it's easier for me to do that,\" she notes. \"I help make sure that we are developing a curriculum that grows in a spiral and instead of just repeating things.\" Vlasis can be reached via e-mail at \u0026lt; Vlasis_char@al .cps.k-12.tn.us\u0026gt;.  Be consistentdo what you say you are going to do at all times and with  every child.\n' A? s/D.. f. . Ntodelaiovefbrlearning. l Di.i^j v : ' 7\n/.\ni\u0026lt;'\"Maintama'senseofhumori\nyf 'A 'fN j-Sffefavarid^tifintetestingi3idices.qfactivitiesfbrldds.' W N.NN Keep an open doorto parents. A T ,  \u0026gt; i*. Maintain reject above all. yy:,\nD?'A-'i-I'i'\n. ' . In a nut^ell:.bejyourself,'Wofk with'paEents, love-the kids, lqye .teaching\n'\n. Source: From What to Expect Your TirstYear of Teaching,Try A DePaul Septmt b^^ 'T'998iJVasKn^n,L\u0026gt;C:tlJS.D^drfmehtofEducdtipil.'.... I ASCD Professional Development Newsletter 5\n:!ggi856W^sda WE 1 t I t ( t t i 1 t T Curriculum Mapping: Charting the Course for Content T he Chattanooga School for the Liberal Arts is one of the schools featured in Curriculum Mapping: Charting the Course for Content, a new ASCD video-based staff development program designed to help educators explore curriculum mapping. The series consists of two videotapes and a Facilitator s Guide. The first program, The Essentials of Mapping, examines the purpose and possibilities of mapping and provides an overview of the mapping process as it has occurred in schools. The second video, Putting Mapping to Work, focuses on revising the maps using essential questions, developmental assessments, and computer technology. In bo programs, interviews and on-site observations offer perspectives of the many variables involved in curriculum mapping, including how to develop a school culture that supports mapping. The videos also describe how implementing curriculum mapping enhances student learning. The Facilitator's Guide includes detailed agendas and activities for six workshops three per videotapeas well as handouts, overheads, and additional readings and resources. Curriculum Mapping: Charting the Course for Content may be purchased for $326 (ASCD members) or $396 (nonmembers). For more information or to order, call the ASCD Service Center at 800-933-ASCD, then press 2. lilBa : i.^'f-' 1 :? A' \u0026gt;5. CTea.lmg and usmg curri^im' maps'ma^ lead to chmges in the way cur^culuni '., decisibnshremade?  \"S*'-'*' -r-.,. :  i-  Curriculum committees can be replaced with site-based councilsvwho use diejnaps r ftr.a clearpicture of the curriculum taught within the site aiidi^o make d^ioi^ ... .^^about issues that arise:  Member of the site-based councils meet at the (U^ct level to. coordinate laues between feeder schools. 1  Task forces are formed to study iKUK that need further research at e site or.. - district level. They iare disbanded when they have completed the study and inade  . Tecommendations. .Se\u0026gt;.-  To (tteafe a school culture that enables effective mapping, teachers mustbe comfbriable working with one another and feel free to be open Md honMt about their operational curriculum..'._ ....................  All decisions about the curriculum mustbe based on what is best for the leyher.  Mapping improves student performance by providing a clear picture of what Aesm- dent actuaUy experiences in grades K-12. giving teachers an opportunity to refine the curriculum to best-meet thestudents needs.  Source: From Curriculum Mapping: Charting the Course for Content, Facmtator s . Guide,^ 1999. Alexdndria,.Vd.:AssociationforSupervisionandG^^mDevelop^t^Ll I///7/9? Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Little Rock School District To: Selected Principals/Schools (Carver, Cloverdale Elem., Geyer Springs, Gibbs, Hall, King, Mabelvale Elem., Meadowcliff, Pulaski Heights Middle, Cloverdale Middle, Southwest Middle, Badgett, McDermitt, Wakefield, Woodruff) From: Mona Briggs, Evaluation Through: Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent\u0026lt;X^Xs Re: Curriculum Mapping Training Date: November 8, 1999 As you know. Curriculum Mapping is a vital part of the school improvement process. Our field representatives from the Arkansas Department of Education will be expecting to see evidence of our mapping as they visit our schools, as this is part of the ACSIP requirement. Your school has been selected for the first round of training\na team from each school will participate in learning this procedure. It will enable you and your teachers to develop and use curriculum, maps. In order to provide your team with all the information and tools that will be needed to train the rest of your staff, we have scheduled one day and a half on January 11 and 12 at the State Police Headquarters facility at Geyer Springs and I-30. The first days schedule will be from 8:30 am until 4:00 pm\nthe second day will begin at 8:30 and will end at noon. Since teachers have had to be out of the building so much this fall for curriculum training, we are suggesting that a team be comprised of the administrator and two or three staff members who do not require substitutes. For example, a team might be a principal, a counselor, a media specialist, and a curriculum specialist. It is essential that an administrator be present\nif the principal cannot be present, please permit and assistant principal to attend. The same participants must attend both days. You will be sent another notification of the training\nhowever, I wanted to get this on your calendar well in advance so as to prevent possible conflicts. If you have any questions vvhatsoever, please feel free to contact me or Eddie McCoy. Cl LL Lt Planriing, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Little Rock School District To: From: Selected Principals/Schools ( Bale, Booker, Brady, Central High, Fulbright, Metro, Mitchell, Otter Creek, Rockefeller, Western Jiills, McDermott, Baseline, J. A. Fair, Dunbar) Mona Briggs, Evaluation SpecialistVy^ Through: Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent Re: Curriculum Mapping Training Date: November 19, 1999 1' 4 iiS As you know, Curriculum Mapping is a vital part of the school improvement process. Our field representatives from the Arkansas Department of Education will be expecting to see evidence of our mapping as they visit our schools, as this is part of the ACSIP requirement. i  I\u0026lt; Your school has been selected for the second round of training\na team from each school will participate in learning this procedure. It will enable you and your teachers to develop and use curriculum maps. In order to provide your team with all the information and tools that will be needed to train the rest of your staff, we have scheduled one day and a half on January 18 and 19 at the State Police Headquarters facility at Geyer Springs and I-30. The first day's schedule will be from 8:30 am until 4:00 pm\nthe second day will begin at 8:30 and will end at noon. fj  'S? i Since teachers have had to be out of the building so much this fall for curriculum training, we are suggesting that a team be comprised of the administrator and two or three staff members who do not require substitutes. For example, a team might be a principal, a counselor, a media specialist, and a curriculum specialist. It is essential that an administrator be present\nif the principal cannot be present, please permit an assistant principal to attend. The same participants must attend both days. You will be sent another notification of the training\nhowever, I wanted to get this on your calendar well in advance so as to prevent possible conflicts. If you have any questions whatsoever, please feel free to contact me or Eddie McCoy. 9 LL l|P|av Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Little Rock School District January 12, 2000 To: From\nSelected Principals (Central, J.A. Fair, Dunbar, Baseline, Bale, Brady, Otter Creek, Rockefeller, Western Hills) , Mona Briggs, Evaluation Specialist Through\nKathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent RE: Curriculum Mapping Training Your school is scheduled on February 9 and 10,2000 to participate in Curriculum Mapping training. Our new ACSIP process requires this as part of the school improvement planning process. In order to provide you with the information and materials needed to present to your staff, please identify a team from your school consisting of an administrator and two or three other staff members who do not require substitutes. For example, a team might be the principal, a media specialist, a counselor, and a curriculum specialist. This will prevent you from having teachers out of the building. The same participants must participate both days. The training will be held at the State Police Headquarters. It is located off 1-30 at the Geyer Springs exit. The facility is located south of 1-30 on the access road. You will need to come through the main doors to the information desk. You will receive visitors' badges and will be required to sign in. The workshop is in Classroom A\nthe information desk clerk can direct you to the room. The first days schedule is from 8:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. The second day will begin at 8:30 and will end at noon. Have each team member bring a plan book from last year for use in applying the skills learned on day 1. The more detailed the planbook, the better it will be for you to do the mapping. Be sure and eat a hearty breakfast, as we are not permitted to bring food or drink into the classroom area. However, there is a break room where you can purchase drinks and snacks during the mid-moming and mid-afternoon break. LESLEY, BONNIE From: pent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, January 18, 2000 5:39 PM BRIGGS, MONA\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nLEASE, KATHY R. Curriculum Mapping--April Inservice Please think through what the schools will need if we let them do Curriculum Mapping training on the April inservice day. I know the videos will be an issue. Can we get permission from ASCD to copy the tape for use that one day? I know we bought several tapes already, but we certainly don't have 50 for the schools to use. Should we combine some schools, perhaps? Let me know what you think. 1 To: u- 1 nloo t .1 1 I 1 I From: Through: RE: Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District Instructional Resource Center Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 January 14,2000 Selected Principals (McClellan, Forest Heights, Henderson, Chicot, Dodd, Fair Park, Forest Park, Franklin, Garland, Jefferson, Fulbright, McDermott, Hall, Pulaski Heights Elementary, Mann Magnet) Mona Briggs, Evaluation Specialist Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent Curriculum Mapping Training Your school is scheduled on March 7 and 8,2000 to participate in Curriculum Mapping training. As you know, the states ACSIP process requires mapping as part of the school improvement planning process. In order to provide you with the information and materials needed to teach your staff, please identify a team from your school consisting of an administrator and two or three other staff members who do not require substitutes. For example, a team might be the principal, a counselor, the media specialist, and a curriculum specialist. This will prevent you from having a number of teachers out of your building You are encouraged to invite your broker to the training, as well. The same participants should participate on both days. The training will be held at the State Police Headquarters. It is located off 1-30 at the Geyer Springs exit. The facility is located south of 1-30 on the access road. You will to come through the main doors to the information desk. You will be given a visitors badge and will be required to sign in. The workshops is in Classroom C\nthe information desk clerk can direct you to the room. The first days schedule is from 8:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. The second day will begin at 8:30 a.m. and will end at noon. Have each team member bring a plan book from last fall or last year for use in applying the skills learned. The more detailed the plan book, the better it will be for you to do the mapping activities. Be sure and eat a hearty breakfast, as we are not permitted to bring food or drink into classroom area. However, there is a break room where you can purchase drinks and snacks during the mid-morning and mid-afternoon breaks. Please e-mail me when you have identified your school team. Call me at 324-2120 if you have any questions. f UL Planning, Research, and Evaluation Instructional Resource Center Little Rock, Arkansas To: Selected Principals (McClellan, Forest Heights, Henderson, Chicot, Dodd, Fair Park, Forest Park, Fulbright, Garland, Jefferson, Fulbright, McDermott, Mann, Pulaski Heights Elementary) /I From: Mona Briggs, Technical Assistance ^9^ Through: Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent for RE: Curriculum Mapping Training Date: February 14, 2000 This is just a reminder that your school is scheduled for March 7 and 8 to participate in Curriculum Mapping training. Please identify a team from your school consisting of an administrator and two or three other staff members. If you are experiencing difficulty in getting substitutes, you may choose to bring the counselor, media specialist, and a curriculum specialist. Some principals have felt strongly, particularly at the secondary level, at math and/or language arts teachers should be included. That decision is up to you\nyou may also invite your broker as weU. However, we wiU be doing training for brokers in April. The important thing is that the same participants attend both days. Don't forget, the training wiU be held at e State Police Headquarters, located at Geyer Springs exit. You must enter through the front entrance and check in at the front desk where you wUl be given a visitor's pass. The workshop will be held in Classroom C. Please arrive early enough to go through the check-in procedures and still be ready to work at 8:30. The first day is tightly scheduled. The first day's schedule is from 8130 until 4:00. The second day will begin at 8:30 and end at noon. Have each team member including yourself bring a plan book to use in applying the mapping skills. If you have questions, please call or e-mail me. I know this is a busy time of year, but earlier in the spring is always better than later when you consider aU the end of the year activities that you will be involved with. Thanks for your cooperation! LESLEY, BONNIE From: Bent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Thursday, February 17, 2000 12:29 PM BRIGGS, MONA RE: CM You always make me smile. Thank you. Oh, by the way, I can pay the $4000 plus for the inservice day. Just send me the bill and don't bother the schools with that. Have you heard that we may use the April day for snow day make-up and then move the inservice day to the end of the school year? Does that make a difference in our licensing agreement? Whatever you decide about New Orleans is fine, but I have the money if you want to go. Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: BRIGGS, MONA Thursday, February 17, 2000 12:10 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: CM Dear B, Having just read Gayle's request, Eddie and I think it would be great for Gayle and Cassandra to be able to go to the pre-conference. Gayle really wants to go and Cassandra did not even get to go to Wilson because of the money issue at that time. Eddie and I believe that the sessions are well presented\nthere is some resistance, as will always be the case when you move peoplej out of their comfort zone. Actually, the resistance has less than one would expect\nthat last session, one school had some \"issues. II Gayle and Cassandra can bring back the information to us\nspending that money on all of us would not be an efficient use of sorely limited funds. There's a lot we need to know about this, but we don't think we will get that kind of knowledge in a conference setting where we hear the overview from a speaker and just listen. However, we do think that a site visit at some pointperhaps in the summer when we have more timeto a school district that has been doing mapping for some year would be extremely beneficial for the \"Bobsey Twins\" aka AAONA and EDDIE! (smile) So, keep that in mind... 1MAE from PRE who are doing NWEA ASAP...yadda, yadda, yadda From: Sent: To: Original Message- Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Thursday, February 17, 2000 12:00 PM BRADFORD, GAYLE\nBRIGGS, MONA\nSTEELE, CASSANDRA\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nMcNEAL, MARIE\nGLASGOW, DENNIS: DAVIS, SUZI\nCLEAVER, VANESSA GILLIAM, ANITA RE: CM If any or all of you would like to attend the ASCD pre-conference on curriculum mapping (see Gayle Bradford's appeal below), then I will fund it out of my budget. Please send your forms to Anita Gilliam for processing. From: Sent: Original Message- To: LESLEY, BONNIE BRADFORD, GAYLE Thursday, February 17, 2000 11:26 AM Subject: Importance: RE: CM High Sorry I missed you last night - I'll be at the NSF meeting at 8:30 tomorrow at Adult Leisure Center. Let me tell you what I wanted to discuss. I'm not sure but think that probably Kathy, Sadie or Mona/Eddie have told you what a fiasco we had in the last curriculum mapping training. There was much negativism on the part of one school in particular and comments as to lack of expertise on the part of the presenters. Well, we (in the opening portion of the workshop) explained that we were not experts and that we were learning along with everyone else but had been slated to deliver this information to them in an orderly fashion to assist them in training their teachers to do CM. We also explained that mapping is a state mandate and have no choice about implementing - however, noting that it was chosen by the state because it has been shown to be effective in increasing student achievement. Anyway, at the end of the session, the four of us met. I told them and later told Sadie and Kathy that I feel quite inadequate. I immediately got on the internet and found that there is a two-day session at ASCD this year (March 22/23) where Heidi Hayes Jacobs is doing CM. I asked Sadie about it - she suggested that I sit down and talk with you about it. I believe we need the training since this is a long-term commitment on our part - a multi-year process. I am requesting that we be allowed to get the training in March so that we can be ready for the rest of the training and implementing all seven phases of Jacobs' model - we're still at phase one but need the fine-tuned information from a training session on the model. We also need to visit a school (s) where the model has been implemented and \"pick their brains\" as to how their training took place, timelines for implementation of the seven phases, etc. Could you please send us to the training? I'm not the type person who feels good about doing half-ass work - presentations need to be good - I don't like to go before a group of folks and present information, let them know what we have lying ahead, and then can't field questions. PLEASE HELP! Gayle B. Bradford Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 501.324.0568\nfax: 501.324.2213 gbbradf@lrsdadm.lrsd.kl2.ar.us Original Message----- From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Wednesday, February 16, 2000 10:02 AM BRADFORD, GAYLE RE: CM I'll be there for the Board meeting on Thursday and for the compliance meeting on Friday morning. Original Message From: BRADFORD, GAYLE 2 Sent: To: Subject: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 1:17 PM LESLEY, BONNIE CM Hi, Will you be coming over to this building in the next few days? I'd like to talk with you about CM training. I won't be in your shop for a number of days because of cluster meetings, etc. around here. Thanks. Gayle B. Bradford Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 501.324.0568\nfax: 501.324.2213 gbbradf@lrsdadm.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 3 DO Planning, Research, and Evaluation Little Rock School District March 27, 2000 To: Brokers/IRC Specialists From: Mona Briggs, Technical Assistance Through: Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent for P.R.E. I RE: Curriculum Mapping Training We are providing a one-day curriculum mapping training session on April 24, 2000, for Brokers and interested IRC Specialists who have not yet had the training. The training will be held at the State Police Headquarters, located at 1-30 and the Geyer Springs exit. You will be required to enter the front entrance and check in at the front desk where you will be given a visitors pass. The workshop will be held in Classroom C. The workshop will begin at 8:30 a.m. and will conclude at 4:00 p.m. Be sure and eat a hearty breakfast, as we are not permitted to bring any food or drink into the room itself. There is, however, a break-room where drinks and snacks can be purchased during morning and afternoon breaks. Please let me know if you are not going to be able to attend. You can telephone me at 324-2120 or e-mail me. If you have any questions, let me know. Thanks!LESLEY, BONNIE From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Friday, April 14, 2000 10:40 AM BRIGGS, MONA\nWOODS, MARION LEASE, KATHY R. RE\nCM Day for High Schools The high schools have two and one half days of pre-school inservice. They must use one of those days to do curriculum mapping. Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: BRIGGS, MONA Friday, April 14, 2000 10:25 AM WOODS, MARION LEASE, KATHY R.\nLESLEY, BONNIE CM Day for High Schools M, Is there a way we can build in time during our summer pre-school days for the five high schools to inservice their staffs on Curriculum mapping? They cannot do it in June with everyone else due to CAP activities. They have concerns about how they are going to be able to do it. Let me know what you think. Thanks. Seek first to understand, then to be understood Mona mrbrigg@irc.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 LESLEY, BONNIE aFrom: lent: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, May 02, 2000 3:24 PM BRIGGS, MONA RE\nCM District Timeline See Anita for a time for us to meet. -Original Message- From: Sent: To: Subject: Importance: High BRIGGS, MONA Wednesday, April 26, 2000 5:09 PM LEASE, KATHY R.\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nMcCOY, EDDIE\nSTEELE, CASSANDRA\nBRADFORD, GAYLE FW: CM District Timeline Great minds run in the same vein...Eddie and I have been \"saying\" we have got to get this stuff nailed down. I gave Daniel the tapes to copy and he completed the taping and they are ready for June 5. We need to get a memo out to principals and yes, we need to determine expectations and a timeline...etc. Kathy and Bonnie: would you guys be willing to sit down with us for a few focused minutes and give us your input on our next steps? If so, give me some times and I will get with Gayle, Eddie, and Cassandra and set up the time and date. Let me know... MONA Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Importance: High BRADFORD, GAYLE Wednesday, April 26, 2000 4:36 PM BRIGGS, MONA CM District Timeline Mona, I am really antsy about getting our CM in focus for both now and the future -- we need to sit down with Kathy and Bonnie, plan/draft a timeline for the district and get their input as to implementation levels, etc. Remember, the principals and even the team members attending the training had the \"need\" to know where they are going -- our district's plan in getting the whole process implemented from the time the teachers map their lesson plans, take their individual maps on to their grade levels, and then on to the final stage of having those maps established -- posted in their buildings for all to see -- and then on a semester basis, reviewing the previous semester's map and modifying those areas they see where changes need to be made, etc. Sorry so long -- kind of thinking as I am typing. BOTTOM LINE -- PLEASE, LET'S GET INPUT FROM KATHY AND BONNIE. Bye, Gayle Gayle B. Bradford Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Uttle Rock, AR 72201 501.324.0568\nfax: 501.324.2213 gbbradf@lrsdadm.lrsd.kl2.ar.us 1 LESLEY, BONNIE a From: lent: Subject: McCOY, EDDIE Tuesday, June 06, 2000 3:50 PM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: curriculum mapping models I checked this out and it's very interesting. I printed some of the grade levels in the areas of math and language arts. They did a good job of focusing on content, skills/concepts, and assessment. The Sth grade curriculum is divided into six units, each lasting four weeks. This example may be helpful to schools using thematic units. This can serve as a good example for those schools having difficulty with the mapping concept/process! Of course, they appear to be further along in the process than we are. Thanks for the \"heads up.\" We have received a lot of positive feed-back on Monday's curriculum mapping activities! Original Message From: Sent: To: Subject: LESLEY. BONNIE Tuesday, June 06, 2000 8:36 AM BRIGGS, MONA\nMcCOY, EDDIE FW: curriculum mapping models Want to check this out? Original Message From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: MADDOX, BEVERLY Friday, June 02, 2000 3:14 PM BUCK, LARRY\nROGERS, SHERRY\nBOYKIN, PATRICIA BRIGGS, MONA\nWILSON, VEKISSA\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nLACEY, MARIAN G. curriculum mapping models  File\ncurriculum mappping.doc  If this site is still active, it could contain some useful models. I'm going to visit it before Monday, if I have time. I know you would be interested. Beverly 1LESLEY, BONNIE From: pent: To: Subject: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, June 06, 2000 12:06 PM BRIGGS, MONA RE: curriculum mapping models Great news! Pinch me tool Making taking the pressure off them helped. Now they are doing it because they want to-not because we said they had to. Original Message- From: Sent: To: Subject: BRIGGS, MONA Tuesday, June 06, 2000 10:36 AM LESLEY, BONNIE RE: curriculum mapping models Thanks! I have continued to get positive reports--from Rightsell, Baseline. Mann, and Southwest. They really got into it! My husband was mapping his physcial education classes and is gonna complete his map over the summer...pinch me now! Original Message- From: Sent: To: LESLEY, BONNIE Tuesday, June 06, 2000 8:36 AM BRIGGS, MONA: McCOY, EDDIE Subject: FW: curriculum mapping models Want to check this out? Original Message- From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: MADDOX, BEVERLY Friday, June 02, 2000 3:14 PM BUCK, LARRY\nROGERS, SHERRY\nBOYKIN, PATRICIA BRIGGS, MONA\nWILSON, VEKISSA\nLESLEY, BONNIE\nLACEY, MARIAN G. curriculum mapping models  File: curriculum mappping.doc  If this site is still active, it could contain some useful models. I'm going to visit it before Monday, if I have time. I know you would be interested. Beverly 1\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_374","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Writings on Program Evaluation-School District Improvement''","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":["1999/2001"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, ''Writings on Program Evaluation-School District Improvement''"],"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/374"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"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\"WRITINGS\" ON PROGRAM EVALUATION SCHOOL/DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTWritings on Program EvaluationSchool/District Improvement School Improvement 1. Document: Guidelines to School Improvement Planning. August 1999 (distributed to participants of summer 1999 Campus Leadership Team Institute)\nsee pp. 1-16 of using data for decision making and prioritizing\npp. 29-30 on Plan Evaluation.) 2. Memorandum in Feb. 9, 2000, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley on conducting a formative evaluation of the progress on the School Improvement Plan with attached ERS research article: School Improvement\nFactors Leading to Success or Failure 3. Document of notes made by Bonnie Lesley in efforts to analyze the first ALT results in spring 2000, by school 4. Memorandum in Dec. 16, 1998, Learning Links to principals from Bonnie Lesley establishing the waiver process, with attached application form, including a required evaluation design. Title I 5. Memorandum to Cabinet from Bonnie Lesley, Jan. 4, 1999, requesting feedback on a draft plan to restructure the Districts Title I program in order to align it with new literacy and mathematics curricula and Smart Start, as well as with the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. ^7 6. Memorandum to elementary principals from Bonnie Lesley, June 9, 1999, clarifying Title I program issues and the importance of aligning Title I programs with efforts to improve achievement. 7. Memorandum to Board of Education from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 12, 1999, on issues relating to changes in the Districts Title I Plan for 1999-2000. ^7 8. Memorandum to John Walker, et al, from Bonnie Lesley, Sept. 1, 1999, relating to changes in the LRSD Title I Plan for 1999-2000\nattaching copy of the plan. Arkansas Quality Award 9. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award to 1999 application for Level I Award, September 8, 1999 37 10. Planning document to write the application for the Arkansas Quality Award, prepared by Bonnie Lesley in April 200011. E-mail to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Apr. 26, 2000, thanking them for contributions to the writing of the application for the Arkansas Quality Award i3 12. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to selected staff. May 4, 2000, with attached copy of application to Arkansas Quality Award program 13. Application for the Arkansas Quality Award: Little Rock School District: Dedicated to Excellence, May 5, 2000 14. Agenda for planning meeting for Arkansas Quality Award site visit. August 14, 2000, with attachment, Arkansas Quality Award Application Procedure 15. Agenda for Arkansas Quality Award Site Visit, August 16-18, 2000 30 16. Feedback from Arkansas Quality Award after site visit on August 16-18, 2000. Evaluation Reports from ODM 17. Memorandum to Ann Brown and ODM Staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 4, 1999, in response to draft of their report. ^0 18. Memorandum from Ann Brown to Bonnie Lesley, Oct. 15, 1999, in response to Aug. 4 memorandum. 19. Letter from Kathy Lease to N.W. Marshall at ODM, Oct. 11, 1999, stating concern that NCEs were used to make judgments in Achievement Disparity report. 20. Letter from N.W. Marshall to Kathy Lease, Oct. 22, 1999, in response to her concerns. 21. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to curriculum staff. May 10, 2000, with copy of feedback from ODM on curriculum documents. 22. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to curriculum staff. May 16, 2001, with assignment to rewrite the grade-level and course benchmarks for the parent publications\nexample attached. (Reference feedback from ODM evaluation of curriculum documents, April 25, 2000). Guidelines for School Improvement Planning Supplement to the Handbook for Campus Leadership Team Developed by the Division of Instruction Little Rock School District August 1999 1School Improvement Planning This draft of the guidelines for School Improvement Planning is the result of a commitment made by the Little Rock School District to consolidate all the planning requirements at the school level so that when a school designs its annual and long-range School Improvement Plan, it is satisfying district requirements, Title I requirements, and ACSIP requirements. To the extent possible, the LRSD uses the language and definitions of ACSIP and ACTAAP to reduce confusion. The School Improvement Plan that you produce will serve also as the Title I plan for the schools involved in that program. In some cases, to satisfy federal and state requirements. Title I schools will also submit some supplemental information to the School Improvement Plan. See p. 68 in the Handbook for Campus Leadership Team for the LRSD planning calendar. Page 65 is a glossary of planning terms that may also be helpful. School Performance Report If you study the ACTAAP document that is included in the back of your Handbook for Campus Leadership Team, you will see references in that paper (p. 10) to the School Performance Report or, as we may call it, the Building-Level Report Card. See also pp. 16-17 in the Handbook in the local section on Collective Responsibility. The School Performance Report, mandated in law in the last legislative session, will be published annually by the ADE, mailed to all parents, and included on the ADE web pages. This report is a part of the overall ACTAAP system and is included in what is required under Public Reporting of results. The indicators on the School Performance Report are the same, in many cases, as the Performance Indicators in ACTAAP, but they include some additional ones as well. It is important for everyone to understand that we have both this Public Reporting document or School Performance Report and the ACTAAP accountability system that includes a separate set of indicators, a reward system, and a sanction system. They are two different things, but there are overlaps in the indicators in some cases. The challenge, then, of the Campus Leadership Team is to develop your School Improvement Plan in ways that will impact not only the Performance Indicators under ACTAPP and the LRSD Quality Indicators, but also the indicators that will be reported on the School Performance Report. The first School Improvement Reports will be published based on the 1999-2000 data, and they are to be available no later than September 15, 2000. You are going to want to show growth in as many of the indicators as possible, of course, so your School Improvement Plan is a vehicle to achieve those improvements. A list of the indicators that ADE will be required by law to report follows: 1Elementary Schools The report for elementary schools shall include three-year trend data and allow parents or guardians to compare the schools performance with state and national averages in areas and shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures: A. B. C. D. School safety Discipline Norm-referenced test results Criterion-referenced test results E. Percentage of students promoted to the next grade level F. Certified staff qualifications G. Total per-pupil spending H. Assessment of the local taxpayer investment in the school district I. Percentage of students eligible to receive free or reduced price meals J. Average salary of staff K. Average attendance rates for students Middle and High Schools The report for middle and high schools shall include three-year trend data and allow parents and guardians to compare the schools performance with state and national averages in areas which include, but not be limited to, the following: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. School safety Discipline Norm-referenced test results Criterion-referenced test results Percentage of students promoted to the next grade level Certified staff qualifications Per-pupil spending Assessment of the local taxpayer investment in the school district Percentage of students eligible to receive free or reduced price meals Average salary of the staff Average attendance rates of students Drop-out rate Graduation or completion rates College remediation rate (for high schools only)\nand Collegiate admission test results 2School districts may prepare and distribute supplemental materials concerning the information contained in the school performance reports, and the LRSD will do so. step 1: Review/Revise the School Mission Statement Mission statements are dynamic and should periodically be reviewed to determine whether changes should occur and to keep the school mission aligned with the LRSD Mission. Step 2: Baseline Data\nTaking Stock Collecting, Profiling, and Analyzing Data Conduct a comprehensive data collection and analysis of the baseline data for each of the ACTAAP and Quality Indicators for your school. (See reprints of pages for elementary schools, middle schools, or high schools at the end of this document.) Fill in the Your Results column with the baseline data as a first step in this process. You may wish to add pages to include other data, including data to address from the School Performance Report. Your analysis must include a careful disaggregation of the trend and baseline data (by race, gender, socio-economic status, LEP/non-LEP, Sped/non-Sped, etc.) You may wish to group the indicators by subject, program, or grade level to determine the preponderance of evidence about your schools performance for each sub-group. Think of yourselves as detectives at this step of the work. Gather evidence, including evidence revealed from other data you may have availablesuch as grades, portfolio assessments, survey information, other program assessments (i.e., computer lab test results), etc. You should also examine data related to indicators that are not listed in the Quality Indexparent involvement data, for instance, or teacher attendance rates, or percent of students participating in co-/extra-curricula activities, or how high school students are using their electives, etc. These other indicators undoubtedly have implications for some of the broader areas of achievement. Do not indulge in finger-pointing or blaming. Your business is to improve, not to dwell on the past. Stay focused on the kinds of discussions that make a difference in student achievement: curriculum, staff development, supervision, instructional programs, student assessment, action research, program evaluation, instructional budget. 3School School Improvement Plan Year Priority 1 Supporting Data\n. Goal(s): One-Year Benchmark(s): 4 School School Improvement Plan Year Intervention: Actions Person(s) Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget i 1 5 step 3: Selecting Priorities Using your data analysis, make decisions about 3-5 priority areas for your School Improvement Plan. You must include the following two priorities until your school has 100 percent of the students performing at the proficient level or above on the State Benchmark or End-of-Level tests\nImprove student achievement in reading and writing literacy. Improve student achievement in mathematics. One priority area may include all the measurements in the ACTAAP and Quality Indicators related to a program area-mathematics, for instance. Some examples of middle school mathematics performance indicators are as follows: Performance on State-Mandated Criterion-Referenced Tests Performance on SAT9 Performance on District-adopted CRT Enrollment in Pre-AP courses Enrollment in Algebra I by grade 8 Hints You may want to consider as an action an activity related to other Quality Indicatorsespecially those relating to ensuring appropriately licensed teachers or ensuring that all staff participate in 60 hours or more of professional development, as those hours relate to the planned interventions. If your priority area is mathematics, for instance, student learning would undoubtedly be impacted with better trained teachers in mathematics content, instructional strategies, and assessment strategies. In other words, you can address some of the ACTAAP and Quality Indicators without selecting them among your priorities. Be aware that you may also have a priority area that is not explicitly addressed in the Quality Indicatorssuch as Improving parental involvement Improving the teacher attendance rate. Remember, however, to make decisions about priorities based on data, and remember that success has to be determined with data, so start at this step with building an understanding of how success will be measured if there are no stated Quality Indicators that match the selected priority area. 6step 4: Supporting Data Record the data that your have identified as your rationale for selecting each priority area. In other words, show your schools performance in two or more Quality Indicators that indicate your need to focus on that area as your priority. You may (and are encouraged to do so) include disaggregated data in listed your Supporting Data. Examples for a middle school follow: State Benchmark ExamGrade 6 Mathematics: 32% performing at or above the proficient level\n80% of those not performing at the proficient level or above are African- Americans, and 70% of those are male. SAT9 Grade 7 Total Mathematics: 23% at or above the SO** percentile\n65% of African American males are in the lowest quartile. % enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8: 12%\nonly 3% are African American males. Note 1\nThe examples above indicate that the school must include one or more interventions designed to be effective with African American males. The interventions might include some actions related to program enhancements, to special tutoring programs, to more use of cooperative learning instructional strategies, to recruitment of African American male mentors, to an emphasis on parent involvement, or, perhaps, a special professional development program for the staff that would enable you better to understand what the root problems are and what the school can do to impact those problems. Note 2: Title I schools can also use this step to begin identifying students who require targeted assistance to support their achievement of the curriculum standards/benchmarks. Disaggregation of data and then an analysis of those data will enable the school to design more effective interventions. Remember that even if a Title I school decides to be a schoolwide project, the school still has the responsibility to target the lowest achievers for special assistance or programming. Step 5: Setting Goals See the pages above with the tables for elementary, middle, and high schools. In the fourth column of those tables you will see a series of goal definitions from which to select for this section of your plan. Remember that there are three kinds of goals: 7absolute perfoimance goals that include a specific percent of students who are expected within a given period of time to perform at a specific level\ntrend goals that establish an expected improvement of one cohort of students performance compared to last years cohort at that level (this years fourth grade compared to last years fourth grade, for instance): and improvement goals that establish an expected improvement of the same cohort from a pre-test to a post-test (this years sixth grade as compared to those same students in grade 4). You might also think about these three kinds of goals in this way: Performance goals are long-term goalswhere students are expected to be within five or ten years, for instance. Trend goals are one-year goalsthe typical way that we look at achievement datahow we did this year as compared to how a different cohort did last year. Trend goals set one year at a time become your Benchmarks (see Step 6 below). If you achieve your trend goals consistently over a ten-year period according to the State Indicators, you would achieve the performance goal for those indicators. Again using middle school mathematics as an example, you might choose the following goals: 100% of our schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 mathematics on the State Benchmark Examination. 65% of our schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50*^ percentile in mathematics on the SAT9. At least 30% of our schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics on the SAT9. 90% of our schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester on the District-adopted CRT. 890% of our schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. Note: The examples above do not include every possible mathematics goal from the Quality Indicators. Your team will choose those which it sees as most important orthose that you believe you can impact in this particular year. Again, if there is an achievement gap that needs to be addressed, then the school may wish to state its goal statements in terms of improvement of achievement for African American males, for instance: At least 50% of African American males who performed at Below Basic and Basic levels in grade 4 shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 6 mathematics on the State Benchmark Exam. The percent of African American males enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 shall improve from 3% to 20% in 1999-2000. ACSIP Advice in Goal Setting: Critical Questions According to the ACSIP documents, the following are important in the goalsetting process: A goal is directly linked to a priority. A goal narrows the scope of the priority. Two or three goals per priority would be advisable. Goal selection should be guided by the critical questions for Federal Programs, Special Education, and Equity. (See below, plus two additional categories: LEP Students and Parent Involvement) Goals are achievement-driven. The ACSIP Critical Questions follow: Federal Programs Will Title VI be used to support the plan in ways that...  Promote equitable quality education for all students?  Provide training in support of local school reform efforts?  Provide leadership in support of local school reform efforts?  Provide for technical assistance of local school reform efforts?  Involve parents, teachers, administrators and private schools in the decision-making process? 9Does the plan allow for one or more of the following areas?  Supplemental (not required by the State) technology related to the professional development to assist school personnel regarding how to effectively use equipment and software for instructional purposes?  Instructional materials programs for the acquisition and use of instructional materials?  Programs that include promising education reform components (Effective Schools Research, etc.)?  Programs to improve the higher order thinking skills of disadvantaged students and to prevent students from dropping out of school?  Provisions for gifted and talented children?  Provisions that are consistent with the Goals 2000: Education America Act?  Activities authorized under Title I, Sections 1116 and 1117, to give all children the opportunity for high performance, to establish needs assessments to perceive deficient areas, and to implement research-based actions that address deficient areas? Special Education Does the plan provide children with disabilities the appropriate modifications, adaptations, and supplementary aids and services to ensure that they have equitable access to the same curricula content as their nondisabled peers? Will the plan facilitate the improvement of the academic performance of children with disabilities? Does the plan hold an expectation of high achievement based on high standards, and does it hold students, the school, and the district accountable for learning and teaching? Does the plan guarantee educational equity for all children? Does the plan allow for flexibility in providing meaningful instruction closely linked to the general curriculum/ appropriate activities enabling all students to be successful in the real world? Does the plan ensure accountability by providing a mechanism for monitoring lEP modifications within the regular classroom? Does the plan evidence issues and ideas presented in Enhancing Student Success Through Accountability and Leadership, published by the Accountability Task Force on the Individualized Education Program and Program 10Effectiveness Evaluation, Arkansas Department of Education, Special Education (October 1998)? Does the plan address the professional development needs of all district personnel relative to meeting the needs of children with disabilities? Does the plan address the use of technology to assist children with disabilities access to the general curriculum/ appropriate activities enabling all students to be successful in the real world? Equity Are students who are educationally disadvantaged achieving at the same level as the advantaged students? Will there be evidence that teachers have high expectations for every student as a result of the plan? Are resources being provided to assist all students in attaining high levels of achievement? Are all students being challenged? Are all groups of students given opportunities and encouragement to be involved in all school programs? What evidence is there that teachers have high expectations for all students? Are resources provided to assist educationally disadvantaged students in overcoming environmental and other handicaps? What evidence is there that learning deficits of certain groups of students are overcome? Are students enrolled in all programs at the same proportions as their representation in the school population? Are academic goals the same for all groups of students? Are all student groups represented in advanced and intermediate courses? Are all constituencies of the school (teachers, administrators, parents, students, and community representatives) involved in developing school procedures that ensure equity? Parent InvolvementTitle I The Districts application for Title I funds requires us to assure the state that all of our Title I schools have complied with the following mandates for parent involvement. Be sure that you have addressed each obligation. If you are currently out of compliance, then Parent Involvement may necessarily become one of your priorities. 1. The District assures that each Title I school shall jointly develop with and distribute to parents of participating children a written parental involvement policy, agreed upon by the parents that described the means of carrying 11 out the requirements of parent involvement and the shared responsibilities for high student performance. 2. If the parent involvement policy is not agreed upon, the comments of those in disagreement are attached to the District plan. 3. Did each Title I school in the District convene an annual meeting, at a convenient time, to which all parents were invited and encouraged to attend, to inform parents of their schools participation in the Title I program and their right to be involved prior to submitting the District plan? 4. Did each Title I school in the District offer a flexible number of meetings in the development of the plan, such as morning or evening and provide (if funds are available) transportation, child care, or home visits, as such services relate to parental involvement? 5. Did each Title I school in the LEA involve parents in an organized, ongoing, and timely way, in the planning, review, and improvement of programs under this part, including the school parental involvement policy and the join development of the school wide plan for their school? 6. The District assures each Title I school will provide parents of participating children the following:  Timely information about programs\n School performance profiles and their childs individual student assessment results, including an interpretation of such results\n A description and explanation used to measure student progress and proficiency levels that students are expected to meet\n Offer opportunities for regular meetings to formulate suggestions, share experiences with other parents, and participate in decisions relating to the education of their children\nand  Offer timely responses to suggestions made by parents. 7. The District assures that if a schoolwide plan is not satisfactory to the parents of participating children that those parents' comments on the plan will be made available to the Department of Education. School-Parent Compact 8. The District assures that each participating schools has jointly developed with parents of all participating children a school-parent compact as part of its parent involvement policy that outlines how parents, school staff, and students will share responsibility for improving student achievement. 129. The Compact will: Describe responsibilities of schools and parents that enable participating children to meet the states student performance standards. Describe the parents responsibilities for supporting learning such as monitoring attendance, homework completion, TV watching, volunteering in their childs classroom, and positive use of extracurricular time. 9. The District assures that parents will be provided assistance to participating parents in the areas of: Understanding the National Education Goals, State Content and Student Performance Standards, State technical assistance for schoolwide and targeted assistance school components, state and local assessment. Title I parent involvlement requirements, how to monitor student progress, and how to work with educators to improve the childs performance. 10. The District assures that parents will be provided with materials and training and coordinate literacy training to help parents work with their children to improve achievement. 11.The District assures that teachers, pupil service personnel, principals and other staff persons will be educated in the value and use of parent contributions, how to work with parents as equal partners, implement parent programs, and build ties between home and school. 12.The District assures that it will integrate parent involvement programs and activities with other pre-school programs. 13. The District assures that community-based organizations and businesses will be encouraged to form partnerships between schools at all levels. 14. The District will conduct other activities such as a parent resource center and provide opportunities for parents to hear child development and child rearing issues that are designed to help parents become full partners in the education of their children. Limited-English-Proficient Students The Office of Civil Rights will expect to see components such as the following in your school plan: Are the needs of LEP students considered in your schools plan (not just in the Newcomer Centers, but in every school where there are LEP students enrolled)? 13Wiaf is.tftaemscimsi' is. teaching English language skite arid itnssdSuiction for LEP students? Are LEP studsints is aligned with the curriculum framewor'^s and iShe,.a^j^jpriate grade-level or course benchmarks? Are critical documents translated i.ritelhe'language of students homes? When \"educationally disadvantaged children are discussed and plans made to meet their needs, are LEP students included? What is the professional development plan so that all teachers who serve LEP students participate in training in ESL methodologies, assessment strategies, and cultural sensitivity? step 6: Establishing Benchmarks State Benchmark Examinations For each of your goal statements, you must establish the amount of growth that you intend to achieve this school year. According to the ACTAAP document (in reference to performance on the State Benchmark Examinations or End-of-Level Tests), p. 15, On average, each schools trend goal for annual rate of reduction in the number of students below proficient will be determined by dividing the total percent of students below the proficient level by 10. Remember that a trend goal compares the performance of one cohort of students with anotherthis year's grade 8 students as compared to last years grade 8. Therefore, at least for 1999-2000, you can compute your benchmarks for the State Benchmark Examinations according to the following formula: 100% minus % of your students currently performing at or above the proficient level divided by 10 equals the number of required percentage points to meet your trend goal Assuming that you had in 1998-99 32% of the students performing at or above the proficient level: 100 minus 32 equals 68. 68 divided by 10 equals 7 points of required improvement. Your 1999-2000 benchmarks would, therefore, be as follows: 1432 (1998-99 performance) + 7 points of required improvement = 39% at or above the proficient level Note: It is important here as a part of your work to calculate exactly how many students you are required to move up to get the 7 points of improvement. Look to see how many students are at grade level and calculate how many of them would equal 7 percentage points. State your benchmark in a measurable statement that includes who, what, when, and how much. In 1999-2000, the LRSD school shall improve 7 points so that at least 39% of the students will perform at or above the proficient level on the State Benchmark Examination in grade 8 mathematics. Who\nWhat: When: grade 8 students in the LRSD school State Benchmark Examination in mathematics In 1999-2000 How Much: 7 points improvement (from 32 to 39% at or above proficient level) Then the 2000-01 benchmark would be 39% +7 = 46%. Etc. In 2000-01, at least 46% of the grade 8 students will perform at or above the proficient level on the State Benchmark Examination in mathematics. To Consider: A divisor of 10 indicates that to stay off the States identified list of schools requiring improvement, a school would have 10 years to meet the state goal of 100% of the students performing at or above the proficient level, assuming the school meets the required improvement goal each year. We in Little Rock cannot be satisfied with that time frame since our average performance is at an unacceptable level in many schools. We cannot wait 3-4 years, for instance, for a minimum of 50 percent of our students to meet the state standards. We have to accelerate our grovizth a lot if we are to catch up with other districts and if our kids are to be competitive with their peers not just in Arkansas, but also nationally and globally. Research on restructuring that works in terms of improved student achievement indicates that two variables that are the most powerful are as follows:  every students access to a rigorous curriculum (teaching the tested curriculum, in other words, the curriculum standards/benchmarks\nalignment of teachers lesson plans with the state curriculum frameworks and district benchmarks) 15developing a true sense of collective responsibility everybody doing whatever it takes in terms of commitment to improve teaching and learning. This variable includes a strong emphasis on professional development and ongoing learning. SAT9 Benchmarks Computing the benchmarks for performance on the SAT9 is done a little differently. If the Quality Indicator you are considering is the one relating to at lOact Rk norAanI __ i_ _ .1 .-^th oc X f -------------------------------------72'-'^'\" ly i'j M WI ik\n? I c\niain lu lu CJI L performing at or above the 50 percentile, then the calculation is as follows\n65/o minus % of your students currently performing at or above the 50 percentile ^ided by 10 equals the required percentage-point increase in the number of students performing at or above the 50*^ percentile. Assuring that you had in 1998-99 only 22% performing at or above the 50 percentile: 65 minus 22 equals 43 43 divided by 10 equals 5 points of required improvement. (That is not five percentile points, but 5 percent more of the students tested performing at or above the 50* percentile.) Your benchmark statement: In 1999-2000, the LRSD school shall improve by 5 percentage points (from 22% to 27%) the percentage of students performing or above the 50 percentile on the grade 10 SAT9 mathematics test. at it is important for you to calculate exactly how many students would constitute 5 percentage points. If you are working on improving the percentage of students in the highest niiartUo thAn _____i_ . . . _ a quartile, then you compute your benchmark as follows: 30% giinus % of your students currently performing in the highest quartile divided by 10 equals the required percentage-point increase in the number of students performing in the highest quartile. Assuming that you had in 1998-99 only 4% performing in the highest quartile: 30 minus 4 equals 26. 26 divided by 10 equals 3 points of required improvement in the percent of students performing in the highest quartile. 16Calclulate how many students that would be. Benchmark statement: In 1999-2000, the LRSD school shall improve at least 3 percentage points (from 4% to 7%) in the percent of students performing at the highest quartile on the grade 5 SAT9 reading test. Most schools badly need to work on moving students from the lowest quartile to the higher levels of performance. The formula for computing the benchmark is as follows: 90% minus % of your students currently performing in quartiles 2, 3, and 4 (above the lowest quartile) divided by 10 equals the required percentage-point increase in the number of students performing above the lowest quartile. Assuming that you had in 1998-99 57% performing in the lowest quartile and only 43% above the lowest quartile: 90% minus 43% equals 47 47 divided by 10 equals 5 points of required improvement in the percent of students performing above the lowest quartile. Calculate how many students that would be. Benchmark statement: In 1999-2000, the LRSD will improve at least 5 percentage points (from 43% to 48% in the percent of students performing above the lowest quartile on the grade 7 SATO mathematics test. In General To compute your benchmark, you have to know two things to start with:  The performance goal for the performance indicatorsthe percent expected (i.e., 100% will be proficient\n65% will be above the 50th percentile\n65% will enroll in Pre-AP and AP courses, etc.)  Your schools performance last year. Step?: Designing Interventions Now that you have your data analyzed, your priorities determined, your goals selected, and your benchmarks established, you are ready to do the real work of developing the plan for improvement. An intervention is a significant strategy, research-based program, or major initiative designed to solve the problem defined by your selected priority (definition from ACSIP document). 17a Your first School Improvement Plan is both a long-term plan (3-5 years) and a short-term plan (one year). After you have thought through the long-term plan, and if you stay with it, then updating the plan one year at a time is not that difficult. Your annual plan simply deletes what is already accomplished and adds any new action steps required to implement the next years plan or adds some new interventions. Good Campus Leadership Teams are always thinking ahead two to five years, knowing that everything cannot be accomplished in one year, but getting clear about what needs to happen this year in order to take the next steps to reform during the following year. If your school does not have a long-term plan in place with which you are comfortable, then your work must be to design as quickly as possible your 1999- 2000 plan for improvement in spring 2000. There is much that you can do to align your lesson plans with the State Curriculum Frameworks and the District Benchmarks so that all students are exposed to the tested curriculum. There are programs that you can put into place early in the year for maximum impact on student achievement. There are effective teaching strategies that you can use that will enable more students to be effective learners. There are assessment strategies that you can use to check student progress frequently and then to modify and adjust your teaching so that more students are successful. All the faculty can make a commitment to form a professional community now that supports an attitude of collective responsibility for results. But begin now as well to start thinking ahead to your 2000-01 plan. Ideally, the design of effective interventions needs to begin in summer 1999 to include in the 2000-01 plan in order for there to be time for the team to do research, to visit schools where the intervention is being successfully implemented, and to involve staff and parents in ways that ensure buy-in. A part of every schools plan realistically includes a plan to plan for the next year and down the road, always looking ahead to what steps should be phased in for total restructuring. Schools that wait until the plan is almost due to begin the process are not likely to get desired improvements. Planning is ongoing, not an event. An intervention, in general, is something new that your school decides to do that enhances, supplements, or goes beyond the District-established programs so that the performance of targeted students improves. The implementation of ELLA, for instance, is not a school-level intervention. Neither would be the implementation of the new TERCS mathematics programs. Both are already established. You may find the following research-based criteria helpful in selecting appropriate program interventions for your school: f i 1 18What Factors Contribute to Program Effectiveness? (from Show Me the Evidence! By Robert Slavin and Olatokunbo Fashola, Corwin Press, 1998) 1. 2. 3. Effective programs have clear goals, emphasize methods and materials linked to those goals, and constantly assess students' progress toward the goals. There is no magic in educational innovation. Programs that work invariably have a small set of very well-specified goals ..., a clear set of procedures and materials linked to those goals, and frequent assessments that indicate whether or not the students are reaching the goals. Effective programs leave little to chance. They incorporate many elements, such as research-based curricula, instructional methods, classroom management methods, assessments, and means of helping students who are struggling, all of which are tied in a coordinated fashion to the instructional goals. Programs almost always have their strongest impacts on the objectives they emphasize. Effective and replicable programs have well-specified components, materials, and professional development procedures. There is a belief in many quarters that each school staff must develop or codevelop their own reform model, that externally developed programs cannot be successfully replicated in schools that had no hand in developing them. ... In fact, over time evidence has mounted that reform models that ask teachers to develop their own materials and approaches are rarely implemented at all. Studies of alternative programs implemented under similar conditions find that the more highly structured and focused programs that provide specific materials and training are more likely to be implemented and effective than are less-well-specified models. ... Although there are examples of success in models lacking clear structure, the programs with the most consistent positive effects with at-risk students are those that have definite procedures and materials used in all participating schools. Effective programs provide extensive professional development. A characteristic shared by almost all of the effective programs we identified is the provision of extensive professional development and follow-up technical assistance. Few, if any, provide the classic half-day, one-time workshops that constitute the great majority of inservice programs, especially those usually provided with textbook adoptions. On the contrary, most of the successful programs we identified provide many days of inservice followed by in-class technical assistance to give teachers detailed feedback on their program implementations. Typically, teachers work with each other and with peer or expert coaches to discuss, assess, and refine their implementations. The training provided is rarely on generic strategies from which teachers pick a few ideas to add to their bags of tricks. Instead, training focuses on comprehensive strategies that replace, not just supplement, teachers' current strategies. Effective programs are disseminated by organizations that focus on the gualitv of implementation. The programs identified in their review that have been associated with consistent positive effects in many settings tend to be ones that are developed and disseminated by active, well-structured organizations that concentrate efforts on ensuring the gualitv of program implementation in all schools. These organizations, often based in universities, provide training and materials and typically create support networks among program users. 19Some examples of interveritk\u0026gt;.asbs^ffimnitaTj( iisrrgusojea^ no school is limited to these) might include the fclfeKwbg,:  Reading Recovery  After-School Resfeg Cfejfc tutoring)  Accelerated Reader  Reading Across the Curriculum  Professional development for teachers in one or more of the following areas: reader-response strategies, reciprocal teaching, the writing process, McRat, assessment strategies, ESL methodologies, adaptive strategies for inclusion, etc.  Extended-Year Program  HOSTS (Helping One Student to Succeed)  Junior Great Books  Family Literacy program  Schoolwide Independent Reading Program  Reading Is Fundamental Some examples of interventions in secondary language arts (again, no school is limited to these) are as follows:  Project AVID (to improve enrollment and success in Pre-AP and AP courses)  Reading Clinic (one-on-one tutoring)  Summer enrichment program for rising freshmen  Reading in the Content Areas  Writing Across the Curriculum  Development of a schoolwide language policy  Professional development for teachers in one or more of the following areas: reader-response strategies, reciprocal teaching, the writing process, use of learning logs, assessment strategies, ESL methodologies, adaptive strategies for inclusion, etc.  Great Books  Schoolwide Independent Reading Program Waivers An intervention may also be something that the school decides to do instead of the District program. In that case, however, the Campus Leadership Team must submit and obtain approval of a waiver. See pp. 8-9 in your Handbook for Campus Leadership Team for a copy of the regulations on waivers and pp. 57-60 for a copy of the waiver application. (Call Bonnie Lesleys office for an e-mailed template for convenience.) A waiver application must include research that will predict more success for your students than the District-established program. Examples of when a waiver is required follows: the Districts instructional language arts programs for elementary schools are ELLA and Effective 20Literacyor Success for All. If you wish to do anything else, you must secure a waiver. The districts phonemic awareness program is Animated Literacy at the kindergarten level. If you wish to do anything else, you must secure a waiver. The Districts grades 6-8 program for regular-level students is a two-period block of the Reading and Writing Workshop. If you wish to do anything else, you must secure a waiver. Schoolwide Restructuring or Reform An intervention may include a series of steps to implement a schoolwide project, such as the ones described by Dr. Steve Ross in the July 23 inservice for principals. Some examples of schoolwide change models include Boyer's The Basic School, Slavins Roots and Wings, or Great Expectations for the elementary level. Middle school schoolwide reforms include those outlined in Turning Points, SREBs Middle Grades Initiative, or Levins Accelerated Schools. Some examples of high school reforms include Sizers Coalition of Essential Schools, SREBs High Schools that Work, and the Johns Hopkins models for Talent Development High Schools. These examples are examples only, i ot recommendations for adoption. Each school should consider carefully wliich model for change would be most appropriate forthat school, whether resources are available for implementation, and whether staff and parent support can be built. More information will be provided on the options available for schoolwide change for 2000-01 planning. Title I schoolwide projects are expected to adopt such a model or to design their own, using the CSRD criteria established from research on the variables that are necessary to impact student achievement. Components of Comprehensive School Reform Programs (Obev-Porter) A comprehensive school reform program is one that integrates, in a coherent manner, all nine of the following components: 1. 2. 3. 4. Effective, research-based methods and strategies. A comprehensive school reform program employs innovative strategies and proven methods for student learning, teaching, and school management that are based on reliable research and effective practices, and have been replicated successfully in schools with diverse characteristics. Comprehensive design with aligned components. The program has a comprehensive design for effective school functioning, including instruction, assessment, classroom management, professional development, parental involvement, and school management, that aligns the schools curriculum, technology, and professional development into a schoolwide reform plan designed to enable all studentsincluding children from low-income families, children with limited-English proficiency, and children with disabilitiesto meet challenging State content and performance standards and addresses needs identified through a school needs assessment. Professional development. The program provides high quality and continuous teacher and staff professional development and training. Measurable coals and benchmarks. A comprehensive school reform program has measurable goals for student performance tied to the States challenging content and student performance standards, as those standards are implemented, and benchmarks for meeting the goals. 215. 6. 7, 8. 9. Support within the school. The program is supported by school faculty, administrators, and staff. Parental and community involvement. The program provides for the meaningful involvement of parents and the local community in planning and implementing school improvement activities. External technical support and assistance. A comprehensive reform program utilizes high-quality external support and assistance from a comprehensive school reform entity (which may be a university) with experience or expertise in schoolwide reform and improvement. Evaluation strategies. The program includes a plan for the evaluation of the implementation of school reforms and the student results achieved. Coordination of resources. The program identifies how other resources (federal, state, local, and private) available to the school will be utilized to coordinate services to support and sustain the school reform. Curriculum Mapping An intervention in 1999-2000 (but a part of your data collection and analysis after this first year) that every school should do early in the school year is the curriculum mapping required as a part of the ACSIP process:  Calendar-based curriculum mapping is a procedure for collecting a data base of the operational curriculum in a school and/or a district.  Each teacher in this initial step completes a map.  The format is consistent for each teacher but reflects the individual nature of each classroom.  Each teacher reads the entire school map as an editor when all the maps are completed.  Places where new information was gained are underlined.  Places requiring potential revision are circled.  The maps are next used in a planned alignment of the operational curriculum with the Frameworks and criterion- referenced tests. Note: Mona Briggs and Eddie McCoy are members of a team in the new School Improvement Department who will be trained and available to help you train key people in your school to conduct the required curriculum mapping. This activity very important in aligning what it is that is taught with what it is that is tested. Some of the mapping has already been done at the District level. Teachers have received copies (or will in the August Preschool Inservice) of documents that display the relationship of the District grade-level and course benchmarks to the State Curriculum Frameworks, the SAT9 objectives, and to adopted text rnaterials. The step for schools to complete includes mapping teachers lesson plans against these areas and to identify whether critical elements likely to be tested on the benchmark examinations are indeed taught before the dates of the examinations. 22Curriculum Map Content Area/Course Grade Level Page___ of Month Unit Topics/Skills Strand/Content Standard (Framework) Student Learning Expectation Standard (Framework) LRSD Benchmark 23 Alignment (from the ACSIP process): Step 1: All the teachers in the school map the subjects and courses they teach. Step 2: The Curriculum Alignment Document is used to categorize the results of the maps. Step 3: The findings of the Curriculum Alignment Document are summarized (e.g., 4 teachers are introducing\n0 teachers are teaching/assessing\n0 teachers are reviewing/maintaining\nStrand: Patterns, Algebra and Functions, Content Standard 2, Student Learning Expectation: Grades 9-12, PAF.2.1. Use equations, absolute value equations, inequalities, absolute value inequalities, and systems of equations and inequalities to solve mathematical and real-world problems. Step 4: Committees of the faculty organize curricula so that concepts in the frameworks are thoughtfully and systematically introduced, taught and assessed, and reviewed and maintained. This step is part of the schools improvement plan because it is a complex process that requires extensive committee work and faculty consensus. 24Compiling Mapping Results ... Lang. Arts Framework List all strands and student learning expectations for the appropriate grade levels in this column. Not Covered Introduced Taught \u0026amp; Assessed Reviewed/Maintained 25 The ACSIP documents outline the following actions to take in Editing, Auditing, Validating, and Creative Development Tasks: Gain information Avoid repetition Identify gaps Identify potential areas for curriculum integration Match with learner standards/benchmarks Examine for timeliness (taught before the test administration?) Edit for coherence Teachers are further encouraged to Edit for Repetitions:  Recognize the difference between repetitions and redundancy.  Adopt curriculum spiraling as a goal. To find possible areas for curriculum integration, teachers are encouraged to:  Peruse the map and circle areas for integration of content, skills, and assessment.  These areas can serve as the springboard for curriculum planning at the teacher/team/school levels. 26Step 8: Actions For each intervention, you need to outline the major steps that the school will take to implement the selected intervention. Remember to include: Steps to provide necessary professional development for successful implementation of the intervention. Include both the initial training, plus the follow-up or peer coaching or networking that are necessary to provide ongoing support of teachers. The plan must clearly show the relationship of any planned professional development to the successful implementation of a selected intervention. Steps to purchase or otherwise secure necessary resources, such as buying instructional materials, recruiting mentors, or soliciting used books appropriate for classroom libraries. Steps to put the intervention in place, such as identifying students to be targeted for special tutoring, consultations with parents, designing necessary forms, planning communications, collaborating with other staff, etc., etc. Steps to conduct formative evaluations (such as action research projects) so that you can modify or adjust quickly, if necessary, the implementation of the plan to ensure greater success. Steps to conduct a summative evaluation to determine the impact of your intervention on your goal(s). The continuous planning cycle includes four basic phases: plan, do, study, act. Then the cycle begins again. Taking a new look at the baseline data (see Step 1 in this planning guide) should be an outgrowth of your summative evaluation of the previous year's plan. complete sentences for each action statement. Begin each sentence with a verb. Some examples follow: 1. 2. 3. Enroll Ms. Jones in training to implement Reading Recovery. Conduct schoolwide parent meeting to update them on progress of implementation. Apply for a grant to purchase Accelerated Reader and ample books for program implementation. 274. Invite Pat Busbea to lirain, oz\u0026gt;wa\\7s ttfGttfhe w'hole school can support Reading Recovery, 5. Set up an action research to .Kieasure (eftectv eness of the new Animated Literacy program at the itexe'. Step 9: Person(s) RespomiWe Assign someone at your school the responsib'ifity for each action to ensure that the action step is actually implemented. Distribute leadership responsibilities, and do not assume that the only people involved are those listed. Some action steps will require committees or teams or task forces. The person listed is responsible for convening that group. Remember to include parents, as appropriate, in these groups. Step 10: Timeline Indicate the approximate time that the action is to start and when it should be fully implemented. An agenda item for the Campus Leadership Team is to monitor implementation of the plan and to conduct formative evaluations of the quality of the implementation. Interventions designed to impact the spring test results should, obviously, be in place when school starts for maximum impact. Step 11: Resources Identify the necessary new resources required to implement your intervention. Some examples follow: $14,000 for professional development $10,000 for purchase of classroom libraries 8 volunteers to assist with independent reading program 40 mentors for at-risk students Reassignment of Title I aide to parent liaison responsibilities $3000 for teacher pay to run the after-school Reading Clinic Step 12: Budget Indicate how you plan to pay for any required costs under the appropriate column. You can mix and match your funds as necessary. Examples of a budget to purchase classroom libraries follow: District $500 Title I $8000 APIG $1500 Note 1. The school must total all the entries of the three columns when the plan in complete. 28The District column cannot exceed the amount of money in your school budget for the specified categories of expenditures. The total of all the Title I expenditures must be no greater than your schools Title I allocation. The total of all the entries under APIG must not exceed your APIG grant. If a school has other sources of money to fund its interventions, then a note should be made on the form to indicate the source of the other funds, such as PTA, CSRD grant, etc. Note 2: Title I schools specifically (but recommended for all schools as well) are required to include the following minimums in their budgets:  1 % of the total Title I allocation must be spent on parent involvement  10% of the total Title I allocation must be spent on professional development that is clearly related to the achievement of your school goals and to the planned interventions. step 13: Plan Evaluation Planning how you will evaluate your plan is a critically important step in the planning cycle. You must plan for both formative and summative evaluations. Formative Evaluations Formative evaluations of the quality of your plans implementation should be conducted as a regular part of the business of the Campus Leadership Team.  Is implementation occurring according to the planned timelines?  Are the people assigned responsibility carrying through?  What evidence (surveys, observations, anecdotes, action research, interim student achievement data such as grades, CRT scores, etc.) is there that the intervention is working?  Are resources adequate?  Do formative data indicate a need for modifications or adjustments to the plan?  How well does everyone (teachers, parents, community, students, etc.) understand the intervention? How well are you communicating?  What next steps are suggested?  What are you learning about change and implementation of other interventions?  What additional professional development do you need to be more effective? 29What is the evidence that you will achieve your benchmark goal? Are you doing whatever it takes to get the desired results? (Remember Dr.Terrence Roberts levels of commitment? We cant just think about it, or try, or do what we can. We must do whatever it takes.) Summative Evaluation Summarize your implementation process of each intervention. Outline what concluded to be strengths and weaknesses in the implementation. Give recommendations for next year. you Summarize the impact of each intervention on student achievement. Did you achieve your benchmarks? Is there a preponderance of evidence that you made a difference with your intervention? 30Quality Indicators for Elementary Schools Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1990-00 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 4 4 K-5 K-5 K-5 K-5 4 4 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Literacy Test Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development School Safety Performance on State- Mandated Criterion Referenced Grade 4 Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test Goal (Definition) 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%.__________________________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually._______ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts.___________________________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 32 Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 K-5 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Average Daily Attendance Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 K-5 1999-00 K-5 Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. ___________________ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 1999-00 K-5 School Safety 1999-00 K-5 Other School Selected Indicators Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually.______________________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. _________ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. LRSD Elementary School Quality indicators Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 90% of a schools kindergarten students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 1999-00 1 Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test The percent of kindergarten students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. _________ ____________ 90% of a schools grade 1 students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy._______________ 33 Baseline Year 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of grade 1 students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender will perform at or above the 50'^ percentile in reading._______ The percent of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50' percentile will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________________________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ 65% of a schools students shall perform at or above the SO' percentile in grade 5 mathematics. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 34 Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 5 5 5 5 5 2-5 2-5 2-5 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9. the Norm-Referenced Ma^ematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test The percent of students performing at or above the 50**' percentile in grade 5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics.__________________________ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics.__________________________ The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 reading each semester._________________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._____________ Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 35 Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) 1999-00 2-5 1999-00 2-5 1999-00 2-5 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 mathematics pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 36 Quality Indicators for Middle Schools Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 6 1999-00 8 2001-02 6 1999-00 8 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) 1999-00 7-8 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________ _______ School Dropout Goal (Definition) 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in grade 6 reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 6 mathematics. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 mathematics. 100% of a schools grade 7 or 8 students who complete Algebra I shall perform at or above the proficient level. 100% of a schools grade 8 students who complete Geometry shall perform at or above the proficient level. 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 Average Daily Attendance________ Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12*^ grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%._____________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 37 Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 6-8 State Indicators Tier I Professional Development Goal (Definition) Your Results 1999-00 6-8 School Safety 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development.______________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 6 State-Mandated Indicators Tier II Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. 2001-02 6 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 38 Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) State-Mandated Indicators Tier II ___________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 6-8 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Drop-outs 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development 1999-00 6-8 School Safety 6-8 Other School Selected Indicators The percent of students completing Algebra I performing at or above the proficient' level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students completing Geometry performing at or above the \"proficient level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Goal (Definition) Secondary schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12**^ grade._________________ Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of .\"noroved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and jyiolent acts. Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 39 LRSD Middle School Quality Indicators Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Your Results Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50**' percentile in reading._______ The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the SO* percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50'*' percentile in mathematics. Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 40 Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 7 7 7 7 7 6-8 6-8 6-8 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test a Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50^ percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________________________ At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics.________________________ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the \"proficient level in reading each semester.________________________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester._________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year.___________ Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1 41 Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________ 65% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course each year.________________________________ _ The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8.___________ The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 42 Quality Indicators for High Schools Baseline Year 2001-02 2001-02 2001-02 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 9-12 9-12 11 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test_______ ________ School Drop Out Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher_________ Professional Development School Safety Goal (Definition) 'P-' 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in Algebra I. 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Reading and Writing Literacy. At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12** grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%._________________________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually._______ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 43 Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 11 State-Mandated Indicators Tier II________________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test_________________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Goal (Definition) The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in Literacy will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Drop-outs Goal (Definition) 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development High schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12* grade.________________ Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate.___________________ ____ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. Your Results Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 44 Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 9-12 I__ . School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) School Safety Other School Selected Indicators L-RSD High School Quality Indicators Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators 1998-99 10 1998-99 10 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test 1998-99 10 1998-99 10 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test 1998-99 10 Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Goal (Definition) Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts.___________________________ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Goal (Definition) 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50**^ percentile in reading._______ The percent of students performing at or above the 50' percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._____________________________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading Your Results Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 45 Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 Grade Levels 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9-11 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.____________ 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50*^ percentile in mathematics. The percent of students performing at or above the 50**' percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________________________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics.___________________________ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics.___________________________ The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in reading each semester. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 46 Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 2002-03 2002-03 Grade Levels 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-12 9-12 12 12 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test______________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Honors Seal on High School Diploma Honors Seal on High School Diploma Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.____________________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. _______________________________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the \"proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________ 65% of a high schools students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year._____________________________ The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a high schools students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas.__________________________ The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 47 Baseline Year 1998-99 Grade Levels 11-12 LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Taking the ACT 1998-99 1998-99 11-12 11-12 Taking the ACT Performance on the ACT Performance on the ACT 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 Taking Advanced Placement Examinations Taking Advanced Placement Examinations 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations 65% of a high schools students will take the ACT. The percent of students taking the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a high schools students who take the ACT will earn a score of at least 19. The percent of students earning a score of 19 or above on the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________________ 65% of a high schools graduates will take at least one AP examination. The percent of students taking at least one AP examination will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________________________ 90% of a high schools students taking AP examinations will score a 3 or above. Your Growth Your Score 1998-99 12 Completion of Graduation Requirements 1998-99 12 Completion of Graduation Requirements The percent of a high school's students earning a score of 3 or above on AP examinations will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________________________ 100% of a high schools seniors will complete all the graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony. The percent of seniors meeting all graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 48 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 February 7, 2000 TO FROM: Everyone r. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT\nSchool Improvement If you are on track with your School Improvement Plan, you have gathered all 5?? available data from the first semester to conduct a formative evaluation of your progress. (See Chapter 13 in Guidelines to School Improvement Planning). Its also time to start making decisions about next years plan. The attached ERS publication on School Improvement is a good one to share with your CLT and even the whole faculty. You can use it to measure where you are - and to determine what you may need to do next. r Attachment BAL/rcm 1I   School Improvement: Factors Leading to Success or Failure I  ss Education leaders in schools across the country are asking: How can we increase the levels of learning for all our students? Many of them are considering externally developed, comprehensive models of school improvement. Others are developing their own schoolwide improvement models. Still others are identifying and addressing needs for improvement in specific subjects or skills. Whatever the approach, and despite the hard work of those involved, school improvement efforts do not always succeed. But research and experience from schools and districts engaged in school improvement provide valuable guidance that can increase the chances of success. f^C^I This ERS Informed Educator discusses the importance of planning and selfstudy in implementing school improvement efforts. It describes several major studies that provide valuable information about what factors lead to the success or failure of school improvement efforts. Knowing about these factors can help you ensure that your school or school districts school improvement efforts achieve their goalhigher student achievement. Developing a Roadmap Stories of successfill school improvement sound a common themi the importance of using data during both planning and implementation. The Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory recommends:  collecting, analyzing, and using data to Inform decision making throughout the improvement process\n using a variety of research tools and a flexible approach to accommodate different situations and research questions\n looking at baseline data, monitoring the improvement process, and studying impacts\nand  forming a small research team comprising staff, community members, and students, which regularly collects data (Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory 1999). Participants in the school improvement process should use data and information to discuss progress on a regular basis, and should make changes to the original plan as needed. In its report Turning Around Low-Performing Schools, the U.S. Department of Education talks about why it is so important to use data to support school improvement efforts. Specifically, Measuring progress and setting standards and analyzing the information to identify patterns of failure and their causes enables schools and districts to diagnose low performance and attack specific problems with concrete solutions (1998,30). School Readiness for Change Robert Slavin, a long-time researcher on school improvement, cautions schools and districts to consider seriously another element that can have a profound impact on school improvement efforts school readiness for change. Although the staff in some schools maybe ready to effectively engage in their own school improvement efforts -with little assistance, other schools may need substantial and ongoing support to develop and implement their plans successfully. Slavin also identifies a third category of schools those in which even the most heroic attempts at reform are doomed to failure. Schools of this type may have recently lost key staff, may suffer from poor relationships among staff, or may have lost funding. Improvement efforts in these schools 2000 Clarendon Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22201 Phone: (703) 243-2100  Fax: (703) 243-5971  www.ers.org Copyright 1999 Educational Research Service. Reproduced with permission. ILGUCiLiUiicLi ikCiCd-ivix uctviuc S^faddressing the basic problems (1997, ^ftom lini -while a school may need ^Ossendal to take a realistic view of as need. feat Affect the Success of B Implementation ffiy,. major studies conducted in recent a rich source of information about the ^at lead to the success or failure of school efforts. In this section, we summarize jof several of these studies. Many of the blap and reinforce each other. pof the Special Strategies Studies Eand Stringfield, in Ten Promising Pra- ^'Jucating Ail Children, observed that imple- Bbf reform programs varied greatly among ae'fent sites studied in the federally con- peial Strati jies studies. The researchers i^ftat many of these programs can work is jiffice that one or more will work at a speafic i\u0026amp;jrtce Ba particular team of teachers and adminis- ^\nNone of these programs can be made ^?proof, school-proof, or district-proof The which the program was implemented had aeiil of power to facilitate or impede its Mutation (1997,127-128). on the experiences of the research teams S$tudied, the researchers identified the foists that were key in most successfill school Kht efforts: ffs^c perception of local strengths and areas ^of improvement, combined with clear at were understood and embraced by fpn of persons who would be affected by gsion in selecting the program and mj iout the whole process of implementation, jhess of members of the school, district. immunity to undertake the reforms. ^g access to long-term, program-specific Kal assistance and support from beyond the (that is, from external program developers ^yersity collaborators). act and state commitment to ongoing staff ropment supporting the school Improvement The context in which the program was implemented had a great deal of power to facilitate or impede its implementation. Rebecca Herman and Sam Stringfield, 1997  The schools and districts ability to obtain and maintain sufficient fiscal support.  A commitment by district and school administrators to maintain the program through a sometimes turbulent implementation stage and to give the program time to have an impact. This last point was especially critical. The researchers concluded that, while it is important to consider accountability, the focus on outcomes must be balanced with patience for process. When a school or system discontinued one program and substituted another without providing strong evidence of cost savings or program effectiveness, teachers tended to become cynical about investing their energy in new programs (Herman and Stringfield 1997,127-130). Findings of the Study of Effective Schools Programs A 1995 report generated as part of a Congressionally mandated study of Effective Schools programs and other school-based reforms identified features common to schools successfriUy engaged in reform. As part of the study, administrators in a sample of 1,550 districts were asked to respond to a mail survey containing questions about the status of comprehensive school-level improvement efforts. The study design also included Intensive site visits to 32 schools, in which the researchers observed what was really happening in schools that considered themselves involved with comprehensive reform (QueUmalz et al. 1995). The research team used their observations in the 32 schools to develop what they termed key features of successfrd reform strategies. These features provide valuable direction for schools beginning their comprehensive reform efforts, no matter what model they decide to adopt. In general, the successful school-based reforms had three key features\n-2-ft: i  Challenging learning experiences for all I students. This feature tended to emerge from I four coordinated elements: high teacher I expectations\nchallenging curricula\nexploration of \\ a variety of alternative configurations of students L and teachers\nand exploration of alternative 5 assessment methods.  A school culture that nurtured staff collaboration and participation in decision making. The most successfill school-based reforms took place in schools that created cultures of collegiality by finding ways for staff and the community to work together on significant changes needed in their schools. Equally important to shared decision making was the reformulation of the roles and authority exercised by teachers and administrators.  Meaningful opportunities for professional growth. In the successfill schools, teachers set staff development priorities keyed to their vision of the reform goals in their schools. Typically, staff development topics related to technical areas such as curriculum, instruction, and assessment, or to managerial areas such as schoolwide planning or collaborative decision making. In some instances, teacher teams developed strategic plans that allowed sustained, coherent immersion in an area. Forsaking a grab bag of one-session workshops, teachers sought the expertise and time necessary to acquire, implement, and reflect on innovations on an ongoing basis. Study of Six Benchmark Schools In a recent study reporting his observations of six schools that were demonstrating success -with their . school improvement efforts, Gordon Cawelti found that each of the six schools follows a different path: \u0026amp;fheir educational programs and approaches vary greatly. But aU focus on student achievement as an sVend goal (1999, 3). Cawelti identified six additional chaA racteristicz*sf* that provizdn e Tvroa 1l1u1 ao brliel icnsii zgrhritT rftoTr* cscz*hooz\"ol leaders involved with school improvement efforts:  There is a focus on clear standards and improving results.  Teamwork is a way of life and helps ensure ac-u countability. People in these teams meet reguand solve problems. larly to examine assessment results and plan instruction based on these results, to plan cooperative instructional activities, and to communicate n  The principal is a strong educational leader. These six schools are led by principals who know that they must focus on the whole system, that they must facilitate the work of others, and that they must solve many problems every day.  Staff members are committed to helping all students achieve. These teachers spend e?rtra time working with students and planning to make the school better.n  Multiple changes are made to improve the instructional life of students, and these changes are sustained over time. These six schools have not raised achievement by changing just one factor, such as schedule, teaching methods, or technology. Substantial improvement comes when a school is able to undertake several changes in an organized fashion and sustain and perfect them n over a period of at least three to five years (Cawelti 1999,63-65). Suggestions from the Education C ommis-sion of the States: Clear and Continuous Communication Is a Key The Education Commission of the States, in its publication Listen, Discuss, and Act: Parents and Teachers' Views on Education Reform, provides suggestions for schools and districts interested in engaging the entire school community in their efforts to improve student achievement. Three key suggestions include:  Communicate well with teachers. The experience of schools and districts across the country clearly shows that if teachers, are not informed and active participants in the process, reform efforts win fail. Teachers who are satisfied with the basic ideas of a reform effort may have enormous frustrations with the way the effort is implemented. Give teachers a voice in the process treat them as partners with the school and district in the reform. Also, let them know up front how much time any changes will involve, what the effect on their work will be, and what they can expect to happen.  Be clear about what it means to set high standards for aU students, and what it will take to meet them. Survey and focus group results strongly suggest that parents and teachers are more inclined to support a goal of improving success for all students rather than buying into the notion that all children can learn at high -3- Lducationai Kesearcn dervice Ilevels. They believe the goal of having all stu- ^dents achieve at stellar levels is counterproductive Sand unrealistic. In other words, higher standards Kfor all receive more support than high standards K\u0026amp;r all. Agendas that include setting high stan- fedards also need to spell out clearly who set the Bistandards and what resources (including instruc- Etion, materials, and time) wiU be provided to help c*' 'children meet them. Show how new ideas enhance, rather than re- 1 place, the old ones. This research shows that ^parents and educators are primed for school re- sform, but they worry that the innovations are not B feasible or wiU go too far. They recognize the K peed for students to go beyond the basics and Rjeam more complex skUls, but fear that basics are fe hot being taught adequately. When you are intro- fc during something new, show how it works with ^'what is already there. For instance, There will  be portfolios and other demonstrations of stu- fedent work, along with more traditional standard- ^tzed tests. Bridge the gap between peoples expeFA riences and expectations and the changes being ^implemented, then show how the changes im- prove learning for students. ^Applying these guideUnes for communication iSfifig the complex processes of selecting and imple- 's [enbng a comprehensive model for school improveJ I ^t, one that wiU affect teachers, students, and the ^^rnunity at large, should be considered as impor- ^mas what goes on day-to-day at the school site. K -4 f t^-Performing Texas Schools Kh summarizing his observations of schools that ive/experienced success with school improvement, \u0026gt;nnson identifies three broad groups of factors that Khlve a profound impact on a schools efforts, ^e are: ^^ttitudes, expectations, and reasons. Successful - ^programs are characterized by a wiUingness to ^question current practices, chaUenge conven- ^tional wisdom, and explore every opportunity for improving teaching and learning...the focus is on ^improving instruction in every aspect of each ^students school experience. ^Comprehensive, focused, meaningful planning. g^This must include an in-depth assessment of i^sgengths and needs, the estabUshment of chal- ^fenging and measurable goals, and an intensive ^Kearch for options that might lead the school from current levels of performance to the challenging goals articulated in the planning process.  Commitment to continuous improvement. This must include a sense of ownership by aU staff in every aspect of the plan, the development of systems for regularly gauging progress, and systems for celebrating success. Successful programs are characterized by a willingness to question current practices, challenge conventional wisdom, and explore every opportunity for improving teaching and learning. Joseph F. Johnson, 1997 In Johnsons view, the manner in which principals, teachers, parents, and other school leaders address these factors may substantially influence whether their schoolwide program wiU bring focus and power to academic reform efforts (1997, online). Examples of Promising School Improvement Efforts The Memphis City Schools Experience Memphis City Schools has, for the past few years, provided a case study of schools in the midst of reform. As of spring 1995,45 of the Memphis schools had begun implementation of New American Schools designs, with six different designs represented. Researchers studying first-year implementation of the programs in these schools concluded that:  AU of the restructuring efforts required a great deal of energy, time, and commitment from the teachers, administrators, and school community.  Restructuring initiatives that provided classroom materials and guideUnes for instruction generaUy started faster than designs emphasizing teacher- developed materials.  Issues of focused leadership and ongoing, focused professional development appeared Ukely to determine substantial parts of the long-term successes of the schools. However, relative to what -4-it 1 t: V, Educational Research Service L might be called reasonable progress, the re- L searchers concluded that the Memphis start-up were successful, with no t, implementations J unresolvable problems (CRESPAR 1997). She Clover Park Experience r The Clover Park School District outside Tacoma, Washington began its journey of change in 1995. \"pie district took a careful and comprehensive look at fwhat factors contributed to the success of the effort, information about the role of the school board and lientral office in encouraging, promoting, and sup- ^^orting change at the school level provides valuable ^^guidance to other school districts. These were the guidelines used to direct district-level involvement SB.3 ^and activity: at W' W\nI B ?* '^J:-  -sj?\n' Board members set initial goals and had frequent and significant opportunities to remain informed about the process of implementation and school reform. All staff understood and were committed to beliefs driving the comprehensive reform effort first and foremost that all children can and will learn. Decisions were required to be based on data and research. ' District money was reallocated to support comprehensive reform.  A comprehensive needs assessment process that promoted collaboration, focused on data and research, and worked well with district priorities was designed and supported.  District structures responsive to the needs of schools were put in place.  Hiring and transfer procedures ensured a good match between schools and staff.  During the change planning process, district staff got to know principals well and supported them as they helped them to provide strong leadership at their schools.  District staff learned to talk the talk of the individual school. Staff development was tailored to individual school needs and the requirements of would not have been as pervasive or as positive (Davis, Sagmiller, and Hagans undated). Hugh Burkette, Clover Park superintendent, talks about some lessons he has learned from the process of supporting implementation of schoolwide improvement in the districts schools. He says:  Comprehensive school reform has to be approached in a thoughtful way. We had to use a process that passed the teacher-test of work worth doing. The self-study process they embraced took timeall yearbut it gave us powerful results. Our staffs collected so much data about their schools. They looked at it hard\nthey identified needs\nthey did the research about what works, what met the needs of their kids. They didnt skip steps. And when they were done with their process, each staff was ready... to make an organized change.  A national model cannot be your whole school reform...You get different parts and have to backfill where the model doesnt address significant school needs. Models dont answer all of the questions, or address all of the needs. They dont fix everything.  Our teachers and staff taught me that every school is unique. At the same time, we insist that the models be Implemented as designed. Their success is based on all of the component parts being implemented.  Establish structures at the district level that help schools stay focused. All of our schools... have developed comprehensive school plans....Because each goal is followed by a series of concrete strategies with timelines and assessment measures, there is no such thing as the failure of a plan. If one or the other strategy doesnt work, our schools go back and revise the strategies. They try again (1998, 7-11). i the specific reform model. In the view of observers of the Clover Park pro- 1 cess, without clear direction from the board and superintendent, and active support of district staff. W these changes (in student achievement) most likely Anticipating and Dealing with the Impact of Change Change is not easy, even when those involved are committed to making the effort. In Implementing Schoolwide Projects: An Idea Book for Educators, the authors talk of the challenges of change and note: Practitioners confront considerable obstacles as they design and implement more coherent educational services... Success stories do not unfold without false starts, and the routes to improvement are -5-\\s/  circuitous (Pechman and Fiester 1994). They go on to identify challenges that persistently confronted schools involved in implementation of schoolwide improvement:  Adequate Time to Learn New Roles. The transition to a schoolwide project involves introducing new and expanded roles, academic expectations, and management structures. Even new resources require that long-standing practices be adjusted. These changes can be disconcerting or overwhelming to some members of the school community. Even with broad support, new initiatives can be tricky to coordinate smoothly.  Communication and Involvement. Without exception, schoolwide project planners said that project success is direcdy related to the quality of communication among planners and the degree to which teachers are partners in planning and implementation. The biggest pitfail is lack of communication, remarked a principal whose school is in its second project cycle.  Adequate Preparation for New Resources. Successfill school-wide projects require extensive training of all teachers in uses of technology, new content and methods, and teaching styles.  Including Parents and the Community. Organizers of schoolwdde projects find that it is not enough to improve instruction, curricula, or materials. Success for the project depends on support from parents, businesses, special-interest groups, and fraternal organizations.  Awareness of Achievement Variability. Despite the strong academic programs and comprehensive assistance that schoolwide projects offer children, student performance on standardized tests can fluctuate from year to year. Dips in achieve- ment in schoolwide projects that are working well are rarely unexpected. Teachers know when a group of students have confronted difficulties, and the teachers anticipate performance below their goals. However, it is significant that these schools have structures that allow staff to adjust the program as needed.  Stabilizing Change. The most consistent threat to schoolwide project success is the change in leadership that occurs all too often and too early in the life of many projects. It is not uncommon for enthusiastic district managers, seeing the success of a creative leader in initiating a schoolwide project, to move that leader into a new administrative slot well before the new initiatives stabilize, sometimes as soon as only one or two years after a project gets under way. (Pechman and Fiester 1994). The Importance of Leadership No discussion of factors that affect school change efforts would be complete wdthout attention to the crucial, yet difficult role that leadership plays. Tony Trujillo, superintendent of the Ysleta School District in Texas, highlights a key component of this role in supporting school improvement: My job is to get ordinary people to do extraordinary things (Ragland et al. 1999,18). How do leaders accomplish this role? In her discussion of leadership characteristics that facilitate school change, Mendez-Morse identifies six characteristics of successful leaders of educational change:  vision, specifically that students learning is of primary importance\n believing schools are for learning\n valuing the professional contributions of staff, relating well to people, and able to foster collaborative relationships\n being a skilled communicator and listener, someone who can articulate a vision and communicate that shared vision to all in the school community\n acting proactively. Initiating action as well as anticipating and recognizing aspects of the environment that might interfere with efforts to carry out the mission\n_  taking risks but not carelessly or thoughtlessly\nencouraging others to be risk takers by providing a safe environment (1999). Participants in several U.S. Department of Education focus groups agreed with the importance of vision and v^ues, and identified the school leader as key to maintaining the vision during the often difficult process of school change: These leaders seldom claim to have invented the vision or the underlying values and beliefs\ninstead, they perceive themselves to be keepers of the dream. They embrace it wholeheartedly and make sure that everyone else does too...Developing and  maintaining the vision challenges a leaders ability to determine how well what is happening matches reasonable expectations at a given stage of implementation. In addition, when faced with problems, effective leaders see multiple solutions that preserve the spirit of the vision. They find it important to -6-Lducaiionai x\\esearcn Service   T study the nature of vision and recognize the stages of its development...Although the details of participants visions varied, each put students squarely in the center (U.S. Department of Education 1996). Hugh Burkette, the Clover Park superintendent, adds one additional responsibility for a leader of change: Leadership means being relentless. Being relentless means being single-minded and purposeful... Of every action and every decision we ask a single question: how does this act support increased student achievement?...! cant emphasize to you enough the power of beUef in providing leadership (1998). Summary In the current climate of change and reform, schools and districts across the nation are engaged in school Improvement efforts. These efforts may be comprehensive and school-wide, or they may be more narrowly aimed at specific areas. It is important to recognize that school improvement is a complex process, and that even a well-designed approach can fail unless school leaders put in place the conditions that support its success. This ERS Informed Educator has provided an overview of factors that can contribute to the success or failure of school improvement, based on research and experience. By incorporating an understanding of these factors into their planning, educators can focus their efforts so that their hard work and collaboration result in significant progress towards the goal of increased learning for aU students. Sources Burkette, Hugh E. 1998. Making Comprehensive School Reform Work. Presentation at Improving Americas Schools Regional Conference (Portland, OR): October 21, 1998. Cawelti, Gordon. 1999. Portraits of Six Benchmark Schools: Diverse Approaches to Improving Student Achievement. Arlington, VA\nEducational Research Service. CRESPAR. 1997. Scaling Up: The New American Schools in Memphis. Johns Hopkins University and Howard University: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk. Online. (September 1997). http\n//scov.csos.jhu.edu/crespar/septl997page07.html. Davis, Deborah, Kay SagmiUer, and Rex Hagans. Undated. Implementing School Reform Models: The Clover Park Experience. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Online, -www.nwrel.org/csrdp/ clover.html. Education Commission of the States. 1996. Listen, Discuss, and Act: Parents and Teachers Views on Education Reform. Denver, CO: Author. Hetman, Rebecca, and Sam Stringfield. 1997. Ten Promising Programs for EducatingAl! Children: Evidence of Impact. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Johnson, Joseph. E, Jr. Promising Practices: Creating School-wide Programs that Make a Difference. 1997. Austin, TX: Charles A. Dana Center, The University of Texas at Austin. Online, http://www.starcenter.org/ptomise/ schppromise.htm. Lake, Robin J., et al. 1999. Making Standards Work: Active Voices, Focused Learning. Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education. New American Schools. 1998. Blueprints for School Success: A Guide to New American Schools Designs. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. 1999. Self- Study. Portland, OR\nAuthor. Online, http:// www.nwrel.org/ scpd/natspec/self. html. Mendez-Morse, Sylvia. 1999. Leadership Characteristics that Facilitate School Change. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational development Laboratory. Online, http:// www.sedl.org/change/leadership/welcome.html. Ohio Department of Education. 1999. Transforming Learning Communities: A Research Project on School Change. Columbus, OH: Author. Online, http\n// schoolimptovement.ode.ohio.gov/ tic/ default.html. Pechman, E., and L. Fiestet 1994. Implementing Schoolwide Projects: An Idea Book for Educators. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service. Online, http:// www.ed.gov/pubs/SchlProj. Quellmalz, Edys, et al. 1995. School-Based Reform. Lessons from a National Study: A Guide for School Reform Teams. Menlo Park, CA\nSRI International. Online. http://'www.ed.gov/pubs/Reform/pt2a.html. Ragland, Mary A. et al. 1999. Urgency, Responsibility, Efficiency: Preliminary Findings of a Study of High-Performing Texas School Districts. Austin, TX: Charles A. Dana - Center, The University of Texas at Austin. Richardson, Joan. 1998. Data Provides Answers for Student Learning. Results (October 1998): 1,6-7. Schaffer, Eugene C., Pamela S. Nesselrodt, and Samuel C. Stringfield. 1997. Impediments to Reform: An Analysis of Destabilizing Issues in Ten Promising Programs. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Slavin, Robert E. Undated. Sand, Bricks, and Seeds: School Change Strategies and Readiness for Reform. Baltimore, MD\nCenter for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk. Online. www.successforaU/ sandbrickhtm. Talley, Susan. 1999. Perpectives: What Does It Take to Reform a Low-Performing School? From At-Risk to Excellence (Spring 1999): 2-3. U.S. Department of Education. 1996. The Role of Leadership in Sustaining School Reform: Voices from the Field. Online. (July 1996). http://'www.ed.gov/pubs/ Leadership. U.S. Department of Education. 1998. Turning Around Low-Performing schools: A Guide for State and Local Leaders. Washington, DC: Author, 1998. I L -7- to Educational Research Service IO' oi More Information on Factors that Contribute to the Access of School Improvement Efforts info-Files on related topics. The following are just a few of the ER5 Info-Files on topics related to change Wschool improvement. Each ERS Info-File contains 70-100 pages of articles from professional journals. i ^maries of research studies, and related literature concerning th^topic, plus an annotared bibliography that deludes an ERIC-CIJE search. Base price per Info-File: $32.00. ERS Comprehensive subscriber price: $16.00. fo Individual subscriber price\n$24.00. To order, contact Educational Research Service, 2000 Clarendon ^iilevard, Arlington, VA 22201. Phone: (800) 791-9308. Fax\n(800) 791-9309. Or order online through the ERS ^eb site, wvw.ers.org. Add the greater of $3.50 or 10% of total purchase price for postage and handling. Phone Visa, MasterCard, or American Express. f A ^d Web site orders accepted with purchase order number or School Restructuring (#IE-194). Provides various perspectives on efforts to change education, including examinations of successes and failures in school reform, why reform efforts succeed or fail, school staff opinion about change efforts, and how to facilitate reform. . Strategies for Educational Change (#IE-244). Reviews models for creating change in schools\nbarriers to change\nfostering a culture/climate that facilitates change\nroles for school administrators in bringing change to their schools\nand sustaining changes in schools. 'About ERS Educational Research Service (ERS) is the nonprofit foundation serving the research and information needs of education leaders and the public. ERS ^^Eprovides objective, accurate, and up-to-date research ' and information for local school and school district decisions. .^ ERS, established in 1973, is sponsored by seven ACnational associations of school administrators: ft  American Association of School Administrators  American Association of School Personnel Administrators  Association of School Business Officials  Council of Chief State School Officers  National Association of Elementary School Principals National Association of Secondary School Principals National School Public Relations Association. The Informed Educator Series 4^-. Educational Research Serrdee prepares the publica- tions in The Informed Educator series to provide busy education leaders with concise, yet comprehensive overviews of the most current research and informa- V tion on topics of priority concern in education. Each publication in this series is designed to keep education leadersincluding central-office administrators, principals, curriculum specialists, teachers, and othersup to date on a leading or emerging issue in education, enabling them to make the best decisions for the children and youth they serve. Prepared by the ERS staff, publications in The Informed Educator series are intended to provide an objective, comprehensive summary of research and opinion appearing in the current literature. The inclusion of any specific assertion or opinion here is not intended to imply approval or endorsement by Educational Research Service or any ERS sponsoring organization. Other topics in The Informed Educator series include\n Helping Students Deal with Conflict and Anger  Curriculum Integration  Beginning Reading Instruction: Research and Practice  Productive Communication with Parents  Ability Grouping: Ejfects and Alternatives  Integrating Technology into the Curriculum  and more! Ordering Information\nStock No. IE-348. Base price per copy\n$9.60. Comprehensive subscriber price: $4.80. --------- available.Schooldistrictsmayalsopurchaseacamera- ready reproducible, which includes unlimited reproduction rights within the district. In addition, Individu^ suD- scriptions for standing orders for each new publication in The Informed Educator series are available. For infor- Individual subscriber price: $7.20. Quantity discounts are mation, contact ERS Member Services Information Center, 2000 Clarendon Boulevard, Arlington, VA 222U1. Phone:(800) 791-9308. Fax: (800) 791-9309. E-mail: msic@ers.org. Web site: www.ers.org -8-Analysis of Achievement Level Tests, Spring 2000 Little Rock School District School Badgett Interpretations _____________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 higher than District average in all three test areas Growth from grade 3 to 4 Math higher than District average Grade 3 seems strongest: higher than average gains in all three tests from grade 2 Grade 5 seems weakest: declines in all three tests from grade 4 Scores below LRSD average in all areas #35 in LRSD in Grade 2 Reading, Language, and Math #35 in LRSD in Grade 5 Reading, Language, and Math Average total growth points (76) Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 26 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 22 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 28 points Mathematics: Grade 223 points below the national median Grade 310 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 517 points below Language: Grade 220 points below national median Grade 32 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 514 points below Reading: Grade 233 points below national median Grade 32 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 518 points below 1 School Bale Interpretations_________________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 higher than District average in all three test areas Growth from grade 4 to 5 Math higher than District average Grade 4 seems weakest: less than average growth in all three areas Scores higher than LRSD averages in Grades 2 and 3 Language and in Grades 2-3 Reading #33 in LRSD in Grade 5 Reading Way below average (62) in total growth points Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 17 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 18 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 27 points Mathematics: Grade 212 points below national median Grade 37 points below Grade 410 points below Grade 510 points below Language: Grade 25 points below national median Grade 3AT the national median Grade 48 points below Grade 511 points below Reading: Grade 211 points below national median Grade 36 points below Grade 49 points below Grade 514 points below 2 School Baseline Success for All Interpretations_________________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 higher than District average in all three test areas Growth from grade 4 to 5 Math and Reading above District average growth Scores lower than LRSD in all test areas Grade 3 appears to be strongest. #33 in Grade 4 Reading, #34 in Grade 4 Language, and #33 in Grade 4 Math Below LRSD average in total growth points (73) Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 25 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 23 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 25 points Mathematics: Grade 216 points below national median Grade 38 points below Grade 413 points below Grade 514 points below Language: Grade 212 points below national median Grade 35 points below Grade 47 points below Grade 59 points below Reading: Grade 217 points below national median Grade 38 points below Grade 413 points below Grade 512 points below 3 School Booker Arts Magnet Interpretations_______________________________________ Growth from grade 4 to 5 higher than District average in all three test areas Scores higher than District averages in all test areas #10 in Grade 2 Reading, #7 in Math #9 in Grade 3 Reading #9 in Grade 5 Reading, #10 in Math Above District average in total growth points (78) Grade 2 to 5 Reading = 24 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 27 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 27 points Mathematics: Grade 27 points below national median Grade 33 points below Grade 43 points below Grade 52 points below Language: Grade 26 points below national median Grade 31 point below Grade 4-AT national median Grade 51 point above national median Reading: Grade 28 points below national median Grade 34 points below Grade 42 points below Grade 54 points below 4 School Brady Success for All Newcomer Center Interpretations___________________________________________ Growth from grade 2 to 3 Math, Language, and Reading higher than average District growth Growth from grade 3 to 4 Language and Reading higher than average District growth Grade 3 seems strong Grade 5 seems weak\ngrowth lower than District averages Score in Grade 3 Math equal to District average #33 in Grade 2 Reading, #31 in Math Above District average in total growth points (84) Grade 2 to 3 Reading = 29 points Grade 2 to 5 Language = 26 points Grade 2 to 5 Math = 29 points Mathematics: Grade 218 points below national median Grade 35 points below Grade 44 points below Grade 511 points below Language: Grade 215 points below national median Grade 34 points below Grade 43 points below Grade 59 points below Reading: Grade 220 points below national median Grade 39 points below Grade 44 points below Grade 513 points below 5 School Carver Science Magnet Interpretations__________________________________________ Growth from grade 3 to 4 in all three test areas higher than District average, Growth from grade 4 to 5 Reading higher than District average Grade 3 seems weak\nlower than average growth #3 in Grade 2 Reading, #2 in Language, #3 in Math #6 in Grade 3 Reading, #6 in Language, #6\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":"umc_awr_50587","title":"Correspondence and General National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1999","collection_id":"umc_awr","collection_title":"Advancing Workers’ Rights in the American South","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999"],"dcterms_description":["Folder of materials from the \"National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1956-1999\" series from the AFL-CIO Civil Rights Department records"],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"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","Labor movement"],"dcterms_title":["Correspondence and General National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1999"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of Maryland, College Park. Libraries"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hdl.handle.net/1903.1/50587"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["records (documents)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1690","title":"Court filings concerning teacher retirement and health insurance remedy","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1999-01"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Joshua Intervenors","Little Rock School District","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School employees","Teachers","Teachers--Salaries, etc.","Retirement"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning teacher retirement and health insurance remedy"],"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/1690"],"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":["37 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, advisory letter from Joshua intervenors; District Court, Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) prehearing brief on the teacher retirement and health insurance remedy; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) pre-trial brief re: teacher retirement and health insurance remedy; District Court, order; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) post-trial submission; District Court, Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) post-hearing brief on the teacher retirement and health insurance remedy; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) post-hearing brief concerning remedies on the issues of teacher retirement and health insurance; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) supplemental response to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's), Little Rock School District's (LRSD's), and North Little Rock School District's (NLRSD's) motions for attorneys' fees and costs; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. JQHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATTORNEY Ar LAw 1723 BROAl)WAV l,JTTl.E ROCK, Alu\u003c..~NSAS 72206 , TEU:Pl!0:-IE (501) 374-3758   FA.\\ (501) 374-4187 Via Facsimile - 324-6096 1 anuary 4, 1999 Honorable Judge Susan Webber Wright United States District Judge  United States District Court 600 West Capitol Llittle Rock, AR 72201 Re: LRSD v. PCSSD Dear Judge Wright: 315 P02 '02 JAN OJ ' 99 17:02 This is to advise that the Joshua Intervenors hereby adopt by reference the Little Rock School Dsitrict's Prehearing Brief On The Teacher Retirement and Health Insurance Remedy. JWW:js cc: Mrs. Ann Brown All Counsel of Record  IN TIIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LI'ITLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF vs. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS INTERVENERS INTERVENERS :MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT'S PREHEARING BRIEF ON THE TEACHER RETIREMENT AND HEALTH INSURANCE REJMEDY I. Introduction. This hearing concerns the method for calculating the three Pulaski County school districts' damages for the State of Arkansas' violation of the 1989 Settlement Agreement with regard to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs. On July 1, 1998, the Eighth Circuit affirmed this Court's finding of liability and remanded for a detennination of the districts' damages. LRSD v. PCSSD, 148 F.3d 956 (8th Cir. 1998). In making that detennination, the Eighth Circuit offered the following guidance: On remand, it will be up to the District Court, in the first instance, to decide exactly what relief is appropriate. The three Pulaski County districts should be placed in a position no worse than they would have occupied if the previous system of funding for teacher retirement and health insurance had not been changed This does not mean that these districts are entitled to receive both an amount equivalent to what the old system would have produced for teacher retirement and health insurance, and the whole amount now paid to them as Equalization Funding. Such a result would be double recovery, a windfall. But the districts are entitled to be held hannless against any adverse effect of the funding change. This means that it will be up to the District Court, after appropriate submissions from the parties, to calculate, as near as may be, the difference between what the old system - MFP A plus teacher retirement plus health insurance - would have produced, and what the new system - Equalization Funding in one lump sum - is producing. The appellants suggest that this effort will necessarily involve speculation. Admittedly it cannot be exact, but we believe that the District Court can make a reasonable and informed estimate. LRSD v. PCSSD, 148 F.3d 956, 968 (8* Cir. 1998). As the State, LRSD, NLRSD md Joshua interpret the Eighth Circuit's opinion, the districts' damages should be calculated as follows: (1) determine the amount the districts would have received for teacher retirement and health insurance under the old Act 34 funding system; (2) determine the amount the districts actually received for teacher retirement and health insurance under the new Act 917 funding system; and (3) subtract (2) from (1). II. Discussion. A PCSSD's overall remedy argument. Although PCSSD originally agreed with the other parties' interpretation of the Eighth Circuit's decision, PCSSD now argues that the districts' damages should be based on an overall comparison between the old Act 34 funding system and the new Act 917 funding system. Compare Docket Nos. 3174 and 3187 to 3227. This argument ignores the previous findings of this Court and the opinion of the Eighth Circuit and should be rejected as a matter oflaw. First, the argument ignores the previous findings of this Court. This Court rejected this same argument when it was made by the State. The Court stated: While the state may contend that the settling districts will receive more formula money under the new funding scheme, the Court finds that because the new funding scheme does not consider the number of eligible employees but instead is based upon ADM, equalized by the wealth of the district, requiring the settling districts to pay health insurance matching from equali1,lllion or local funds is not a \"fair and rational\" adjustment to the funding formula. 2 Docket No. 2968, Memorandum Opinion and Order, p. 5 ( emphasis supplied). Assuming PCS SD' s calculations are correct, LRSD would recover nothing under an overall remedy. Docket No. 3227, Exhibit A Consequently, LRSD would be forced to use equalization funding or local funds to pay its teacher retirement and health insurance costs. As quoted above, that is exactly why this Court found that the Act 917 funding system violated the Settlement Agreement with regard to teacher retirement and health insurance. It would be absurd to now adopt a \"remedy'' that brings about the same result. Not surprisingly, an overall remedy results in a windfall to PCSSD. PCSSD claims that the overall change from Act 34 to Act 917 decreased PCSSD's total state funding by $3,794,039 in 1996-97 and $2,781,691 in 1997-98. Docket No. 3227, Exhibit A, p. 3. PCSSD seeks to recover these amounts as its remedy for the State's liability with regard to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs. However, according to PCSSD's own calculations, its loss for teacher retirement and health insurance totaled only $1,830,003 in 1996-97 and $1,679,881 in 1997-98. Docket No. 3186, Exhibit A and B. Thus, an overall remedy results in PCSSD being awarded damages more than three million dollars in excess of its actual loss in teacher retirement and health insurance funding. The difference between PCS SD' s teacher retirement and health insurance loss and its overall loss results, at least in part, from the adverse impact on PCS SD of the change in the funding formula for distributing general state aid, what was called MFP A under Act 34 and what is now called equalization funding under Act 917. PCSSD seeks to recover this amount despite the fact that no court has found that the Act 917 funding formula per se violates the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement permits the State to make \"[f]air and rational adjustments to the funding 3 formula which have general applicability blltwl,ich nd,,ce tire proportion of State aid to any of the Districts .... \" Settlement Agreement ,U.L (emphasis supplied). Therefore, even if PCSSD is correct in its assertion that it received less general state aid under the Act 917 funding system compared to what it would have received under the Act 34 funding system, this does not establish that Act 917 funding formula violates the Settlement Agreement. PCSSD bears the burden of proving that Act 917 was not a fair and rational adjustment to the funding formulcl. PCSSD moved for summary judgment on this issue on September 2, 1997, while the teacher retirement and health insurance appeals were pending before the Eighth Circuit. Docket No. 3042 and 3043. This Court denied that motion on January 12, 1998 \"[b ]ecause there are genuine issues of material fact in dispute regarding the state funding formula.\" Docket No. 3104, p. 2. Those issues of material fact remain unresolved. Second, PCSSD's argument ignores the precise issue before the Eighth Circuit. The Eighth Circuit clearly limited its opinion to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs. In the opening paragraph ofits opinion, the Eighth Circuit stated that \"[t]he question presented is whether changes made by the State of Arkansas in the funmng of retirement and health insurance for teachers violated [the Settlement Agreement].\" Id. at 963 ( emphasis supplied). The Eighth Circuit began its discussion stating, \"This case has to do with two important categories of school operating expenses: contributions for teacher retirement and employees' health insurance.\" Id. ( emphasis supplied). Nothing in the Eighth Circuit's discussion indicates that the court went beyond the question presented to find that the Act 917 funding formula violated the Settlement Agreement. Third, PCSSD's argument ignores the whole of the Eighth Circuit's opinion. Taken in the context of the question presented, the remedy contemplated by the Eighth Circuit was clearly limited 4 to the districts' loss in teacher retirement and health insurance funding. the Eighth Circuit began its description of the remedy by stating that \"[t]he three Pulaski County districts should be placed in a position no worse than they would have occupied if the previous system of funding for teacher retirement and health insurance had not been changed \" Id. at 968 ( emphasis supplied). The Eighth Circuit recognized, however, that the districts' equalization funding included some amount for teacher retirement and health insurance. lg. at 965. Accordingly, it directed this Court to reduce the districts' damages by this amount in order to prevent a double recovery. The Eighth Circuit stated: The three Pulaski County districts should be placed in a position no worse than they would have occupied if the previous system of funding/or teacher retirement and health insurance had not been changed This does not mean that these districts are entitled to receive both an amount equivalent to what the old system would have  produced/or teacher retirement and health insurance, and the whole amount now paid to them as Equalization Funding. Such a result would be double recovery, a windfall. Id. (emphasis supplied). Thus, the first step in determining the districts' damages is to calculate \"what the old system would have produced/or teacher retirement and health insurance.\" Id. What the old Act 34 system produced for teacher retirement and health insurance was the districts' actual costs for those programs. Summarizing its explanation of the remedy, the Eighth Circuit concluded: Id. But the districts are entitled to be held harmless against any adverse effect of the funding change. This means that it will be up to the District Court, after appropriate submissions from the parties, to calculate, as near as may be, the difference between what the old system - MFP A plus teacher retirement plus health insurance - would have produced, and what the new system - Equalization Funding in one lump sum - is producing. 5 Reading these final two sentences in isolation, PCSSD contends that the Eighth Circuit's opinion calls for an overall remedy. However, the failure of the Eighth Circuit to repeat for the third time \"for teacher retirement and health insurance\" after the words \"produced\" and \"producing\" in no way indicates that the Eighth Circuit intended to completely depart from the rest of the opinion and the preceding sentences in the same paragraph. These final two sentences may properly be read as follows: This means that it will be up to the District Court, after appropriate submissions from the parties, to calculate, as near as may be, the difference between what the old system - MFP A plus teacher retirement plus health insurance- would have produced [for teacher retirement and health insurance], and what the new system - Equalization Funding in one lump sum - is producing [for teacher retirement and health insurance]. The Eighth Circuit most certainly would have expressly stated and explained the basis for an overall remedy if such was its intention. This it did not do. Rather, it described the logical course this Court should follow in determining the districts' damages \"for teacher retirement and health insurance.\" The Eighth Circuit's use of the phrase ''MFP A plus teacher retirement plus health insurance\" should not be construed as a mathematical equation, but rather as a general description of the old Act 34 funding system. Even if construed as a mathematical equation, however, the phrase in no way dictates an overall remedy. As discussed above, the preceding sentences make it clear that the Eighth Circuit was concerned with \"what the old system would have produced for teacher retirement and health insurance.\" Id. Both this Court and the Eighth Circuit have recognized that, under the old Act 34 funding system, the State paid the districts' teacher retirement and health insurance costs outside of the funding formula used to distribute MFPA. See LRSD v. PCSSD,'148 F.3d at 963. 6 Thus, the tenn MFP A essentially means zero in this context. In accord with this understanding, all of the parties, including PCSSD, originally submitted a proposed remedy based on the districts' actual costs. Docket Nos. 317 4-77. Finally, the Eighth Circuit's rationale for finding that the Act 917 funding system violated the Settlement Agreement with regard to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs cannot be extended to the entire Act 917 funding system or the entire Act 917 funding fonnula. Quoting this Court's teacher retirement opinion, the Eighth Circuit explained: [I]nstead of directly funding each district based on the number of employees, the State has included funds for teacher retirement in the new funding scheme which distributes funds on a per ADM basis equalized by the wealth of the district. Just as the workers' compensation \"seed money'' fonnula worked to the detriment of the employee-heavy Pulaski County districts, so too does the distribution of teacher retirement contributions though the new funding formula give the districts less money to fund teacher retirement. While the three Pulaski County school districts may fare better under the new funding scheme from a state aid perspective, there is no question that the amount of their teacher retirement funding, previously directly funded by the State based upon the eligible salaries paid to their employees, will be reduced and result in unequal state funding. Id. at 967. The change from the Act 34 funding formula to the Act 917 funding fonnula does not suffer from this same defect. While teacher retirement and health insurance funding were based on the number of employees, the Act 34 funding formula was not. To summarize, the districts' remedy must, at a minimum, place them in a position which will not require them to use equalization funding or local funds to pay their teacher retirement and health insurance costs. An overall remedy would not achieve this because LRSD would be denied any recovery, notwithstanding an obvious loss of funding under Act 917 to pay these costs. Moreover, the Eighth Circuit's opinion cannot be fairly read as calling for an overall remedy. In discussing the issue and in outlining the remedy, the opinion clearly addresses only the districts' claims as to the 7 teacher retirement and health insurance programs. The Eighth Circuit's opinion should not be read to grant relief beyond the issues before the court. Bailey v. Henslee, 309 F.2d 840 (8* Cir. 1962) Therefore, an overall remedy should be rejected, and the districts' damages should be based on their loss of teacher retirement and health insurance funding. B. Damages based on the districts' loss of teacher retirement and health insurance funding. 1. Actual costs vs. equal funding. To award the districts damages based on their loss of teacher retirement and health insurance funding, this Court must resolve three additional issues. First, the State disagrees with the districts and Joshua on the starting point for calculating the districts' damages. The State argues that the districts' damages should be based on their actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs. The districts and Joshua contend that the State should be required to pay the districts the same percentage of teacher retirement and health insurance costs paid by the State to all other school districts in Arkansas. In both the 1995-96 and 1996-97 school year, the State paid school districts outside Pulaski County 107% of their actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs.1 In order to provide equal funding to the three Pulaski County districts, the starting point for their damages should be 107% of their actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs. Docket No. 3187, Exhibit 1. 1Using Exhibit A to the Declaration of Tristan D. Greene (Docket No. 3176), this percentage may be calculated by first subtracting the actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs of the three Pulaski County districts from the statewide total to obtain the actual teacher retirement and health insurance costs of other districts in the state. The amount other districts received in excess of their actual costs is equal to the total desegregation adjustment shown in column 4. The total desegregation adjustment is then added to the actual teacher retirement costs of other districts. This equals the actual amount received by other districts in the state for their teacher retirement and health insurance costs. The percentage of costs received by other districts in the state is determined by dividing the actual amount received by other districts in the state by the actual costs of other districts in the state. In both 1996-97 and 1997-98, this percentage is 107%. 8 In the Eighth Circuit's workers' compensation opinion, the court defined the workers' compensation \"program\" as \"equal State funding of workers' compensation for all school districts.\" LRSD v. PCS SD, 83 F.3d at 1018. Accordingly, the Eighth Circuit found that this Court \"correctly held that the State must disburse seed money to the Pulaski County districts in the same percentage as it does statewide.\" Id. ( emphasis supplied). 2 Likewise, the State must disburse teacher retirement and health insurance funding to the districts \"in the same percentage as it does statewide.\" Therefore, the starting point for determining the districts' damages should be the percentage of teacher retirement and health insurance costs paid by the State to other districts in Arkansas rather than the three Pulaski County districts' actual costs. See Docket No. 3187, Districts' Brief, for a more complete discussion of this issue. 2. The amount of equalization funding received for teacher retirement and health insurance. The second issue concerns the amount of equalization funding received by the districts to pay their teacher retirement and health insurance costs. The State, LRSD, NLRSD and Joshua disagree with PCSSD as to the appropriate method for calculating this amount. The State proposes a methodology which takes into account the equalizing effect of the Act 917 funding formula. On August 19, 1998, all three districts agreed that the State's method was appropriate. See Docket No. 2Specifically, this Court stated: [T]he Court does find that the State must assist the three Pulaski County school districts to the same degree that it is assisting the other districts in the state. Thus, the state must fund the same proportion of the cost of each of the three Pulaski County school district' workers' compensation insurance as it pays for all the other school districts in the state beginning with the 1994-95 school year. Docket No. 2337, Memorandum Opinion and Order filed Jan. 13, 1995, p. 6-7. 9 3187. However, it appears PCSSD now intends to pursue its alternative methodology, which assumes that the Act 917 funding formula distributed equalization funding based only on a district's Average Daily Membership (''ADM''). PCS SD' s methodology should be rejected because it conflicts with the findings of this Court which were affirmed by the Eighth Circuit and because it fails to take into account the equalization effect of the Act 917 funding formula. (a) The State's methodology. The State proposes that the amount of equalization funding received by the districts for teacher retirement and health insurance be determined by a simple two-step calculation. First, the total teacher retirement and health insurance costs for all school districts in the state is divided by the total amount of state aid distributed through the Act 917 funding formula to get a percentage. Next, this percentage is multiplied by the total amount of Act 917 funding received by a district, with the  result being the amount of Act 917 funding the district received for teacher retirement and health insurance. The State's methodology recognizes that there is no way to trace funding for teacher retirement and health insurance through the Act 917 funding formula. As this Eighth Circuit noted, teacher retirement and health insurance funding \"has been folded into the over-all Equalization Funding system .... \" Id. at 965. Because money is fungible, the only reasonable assumption that can be made is that the funding for teacher retirement and health insurance was equally distributed among school districts. Therefore, the State's methodology assumes that, if 15% of equalization funding for all districts was for teacher retirement and health insurance, then 15% of LRSD's equalization funding was for teacher retirement and health insurance. 10 The present case is similar to trust cases involving the commingling of trust assets with other assets. In effect, the State has commingled the teacher retirement and health insurance funding with equalization funding. Where a trustee commingles trust assets with other assets, the trust maintains a right to the trust assets based on their proportion to the whole. See, e.:\u0026., Restatement (Second) of Trusts,  202, comment n. Similarly, the amount of teacher retirement and health insurance funding the districts received should be based on the proportion of teacher retirement and health insurance funding to the whole of equalization funding. This is the result achieved by the State's methodology. The State currently uses this proposed methodology to detennine the amount of equalization funding school districts receive from the Education Excellence Trust Fund (\"Trust Fund\"). Ark. Code. Ann.  6-5-307 (Michie Supp. 1997) requires school districts to spend funding from the Trust  Fund on teachers' salaries. Ark . . Code. Ann.  6-5-307 (Michie Supp. 1997). Like the teacher retirement and health insurance programs, funding from the Trust Fund was once distributed outside the funding formula. When the State began distributing the Trust Fund as a part of equalization funding, school districts still needed to know the amount of funding they received from the Trust Fund in order to determine their compliance with Ark. Code Ann.  6-5-307. The State developed the methodology it now proposes in the present case to detennine the amount of equalization funding a district received from the Trust Fund. This methodology has already been subjected to public comment and adopted by the State Board of Education. The State's regulations setting forth this methodology are attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Most importantly, the State's methodology provides the greatest benefit to desegregation in that it results in the greatest monetary award for each school district, including PCS SD. See Docket 11 No. 3187, Districts' Response, Exhibit 1. Under PCSSD's own methodology (which assumes the districts recover more than their actual costs), PCS SD damages total $3,509,884 for the 1996-97 and 1997-98 school year. Docket No. 3186, Exhibit A and B. However, using the State's methodology ( and also assuming the districts recover more than their actual costs), PCS SD' s damages total $4,142, 571. See Docket No. 3187, Districts' Response, Exhibit 1. PCSSD's method had a much more significant impact on LRSD. Under PCSSD's methodology, LRSD's damages total $10,726,693. ill Exhibit 2 attached. The State's methodology results in a damage award to LRSD of Sl 7,819,759. See Docket No. 3187, Districts' Response, Exhibit 1. (b) PCSSD Methodology. PCS SD proposes calculating the amount of equalization funding received by the districts for teacher retirement and health insurance based on the assumption that each school district received the same amount per ADM. PCS SD takes the total teacher retirement and health insurance costs for all districts and the State and divides that amount by the total state ADM. The resulting per ADM amount is then multiplied by a district's ADM to determine the amount of equalization funding received by the district for teacher retirement and health insurance. PCSSD's methodology should be rejected for several reasons. First, it assumes that all districts received the same amount per ADM and thereby fails to take into account the equalizing effect of the Act 917 funding formula. As this Court has found, \"the State has included funds for teacher retirement in the new funding scheme which distributes funds on a perADM basis equalized by the wealth of the district.\" Docket No. 2930, Memorandum Opinion and Order, p. 9 (emphasis supplied). The equalizing effect of the Act 917 funding formula means that districts with greater local resources receive less equalization funding. For example, due to 12 differences in local resources, LRSD received $1,858.73 per ADM in equalization funding in 1997-98 and PCS SD received $2,815.47 per ADM in equaliz.ationfunding in 1997-98. See Exhibit 3 attached. PCS SD contends, however, that both districts received $428.18 per ADM for teacher retirement and health insurance. ~ Exhibit 2 attached. Thus, according to PCS SD, 23% ofLRSD' s equalization funding was for teacher retirement and health insurance while only 15% ofPCSSD's equalization funding was for teacher retirement and health insurance. No rational basis supports the assumption that a greater proportion of LRSD' s equalization funding was for teacher retirement and health insurance. PCS SD' s method would result in LRSD being forced to use equaliz.ation funding or local funds to pay its teacher retirement and health insurance costs, but this is why the change to Act 917 violated the Settlement Agreement with regard to the teacher retirement and health insurance programs in the first place. As this Court stated, \"requiring the settling districts to pay health - insurance matching from equaliz.ation or local funds is not a 'fair and rational' adjustment to the funding formula.\" Docket No. 2968, Memorandum Opinion and Order, p. 5. PCS SD attempts to justify the use of a pure ADM calculation by making the assumption that the money for teacher retirement and health insurance was removed from the Act 917 funding formula after equalization and distributed separately. However, there is no factual basis for making this assumption. Teacher retirement and health insurance funding was not removed from equalization funding, and it was not distributed separately after distribution of equaliz.ation funding. Rather, teacher retirement and health insurance funding was commingled with equalization funding. Therefore, the State's methodology provides the only reasonable means for determining the amount of equalization funding the districts received for teacher retirement and health insurance. 13 3. PCSSD's cap argument. Finally, PCS SD argues that the Eighth Circuit's opinion requires a comparison of the overall impact of the change from Act 34 to Act 917 for the purpose of establishing a limit or cap on the districts' damages. While this would not affect PCSSD, calculations submitted by PCS SD indicate that it would bar any recovery by LRSD. Docket No. 3227. PCSSD's motive in making this argument results from a concern about the disparity in teachers' salaries betweenPCSSD and LRSD. PCSSD apparently hopes to prevent LRSD from following through on a promised pay increase contingent upon its recovery in this case. The best indicator of the lack of merit in this argument is the fact that the State itself does not make it, despite the fact that the State would be the real beneficiary if the argument prevailed. As the State concedes, however, a cap on the districts' damages in the manner suggested by PCSSD would violate the Settlement Agreement. - First, capping the districts' damages based on an overall comparison between Act 34 and Act 917 would violate Paragraphs II.E. and II.L. of the Settlement Agreement by depriving the districts of the benefit of the change in the funding formula. The final sentence of Paragraph II.E. prevents the State from using general state aid (now equalization funding) to supplant its funding obligations under the Settlement Agreement. It provides, \"The funds paid by the State under this agreement are not intended to supplant any existing or future funding which is ordinarily the responsibility of the State of Arkansas.\" Settlement Agreement, ,i II.E. Therefore, assuming for the purpose of argument that LRSD benefitted overall from the change to the Act 917 funding system, the fact remains that the State failed to pay the same percentage ofLRSD's teacher retirement and health insurance costs as it paid to other school districts in the state, and this violates the Settlement Agreement. 14 A cap on the districts' damages as suggested by PCSSD would also violate Paragraph II.L. of the Settlement Agreement. The Eighth Circuit described this paragraph as an \"anti-retaliation clause.\" Id. at 966, quoting LRSD v. PCSSD, 83 F.3d 1013, 1018 (8* Cir. 1996). Discussing Paragraph II.L. in the workers' compensation decision, the Eighth Circuit explained: Id. Its purpose, by its very words, is to prevent the State from cutting other programs in order to pay for its desegregation commitments. U: for example, the State had passed a statute decreasing or eliminating workers' compensation payments for the settling districts only, while maintaining its system of paying the costs to other school districts, this portion of the Settlement Agreement would have clearly been offended. The flaw in PCSSD's cap argument can also be demonstrated by consideration of a hypothetical statute. Assume the State passed a statute adopting the Act 917 funding system but continuing to directly pay school districts' teacher retirement and health insurance costs. Assume e next that the statute provided that the State would not pay the three Pulaski County districts' teacher retirement and health insurance costs to the extent they benefitted from the overall change in the funding formula. Such a statute would clearly violate the Settlement Agreement. In this hypothetical, numerous school districts in the state would receive increased state aid as a result of the change in the funding formula, but only the three Pulaski County districts would be required to use any increase in state aid to pay their teacher retirement and health insurance costs. PCS SD' s cap argument brings about the same result as the hypothetical statute. Therefore, a cap on the districts' damages would, in and of itself, violate the Settlement Agreement and should be rejected. The Eighth Circuit stated in its teacher retirement and health insurance opinion that its decision in the workers' compensation case \"points the way towards a proper solution of the present appeal.\" The Eighth Circuit's opinion in the workers' compensation case in no way indicates that the 15 districts may only recover damages to the extent that they lost money overall due to the change in the funding system. The court simply held that \"the State must disburse seed money to the Pulaski County districts in the same percentage as it does statewide.\" LRSD v. PCSSD, 83 F.3d at 1018. The court imposed no requirement that the districts must lost out overall as a result of the overall funding changes, and this Court should not interpret "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1017","title":"\"Critical Performance Priorities, End of Year Report,\" Little Rock School District","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","School employees","School facilities","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["\"Critical Performance Priorities, End of Year Report,\" Little Rock School District"],"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/1017"],"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\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition and may contain some errors.\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"lru_tulane-moore_70384","title":"Desire Housing Project","collection_id":"lru_tulane-moore","collection_title":"Long Civil Rights Movement: Photographs from the Ronnie Moore Papers, 1964 -1972","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Louisiana, Orleans Parish, New Orleans, 29.95465, -90.07507"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999"],"dcterms_description":["The Desire Housing Project in New Orleans.","reference@amistadresearchcenter.org"],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["New Orleans, La. : Tulane University Digital Library"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Desire Housing Project (New Orleans, La.)","New Orleans (La.)"],"dcterms_title":["Desire Housing Project"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Amistad Research Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://digitallibrary.tulane.edu/islandora/object/tulane%3A70384"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Physical rights are retained by the Amistad Research Center. The materials in this exhibition are being made available for personal and scholarly research use only. Copyright is retained in accordance with U.S. copyright laws. If you are the rightful copyright holder of an item represented in this exhibition and wishes to have it removed, please submit a request to reference@amistadresearchcenter.org including proof of ownership and clear identification of the work, preferably with URL."],"dcterms_medium":["black-and-white photographs"],"dcterms_extent":["5 x 7 inches"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_907","title":"Discipline: ''Analysis of Disciplinary Actions, District Level,'' North Little Rock School District","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":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School discipline"],"dcterms_title":["Discipline: ''Analysis of Disciplinary Actions, District Level,'' North Little Rock School District"],"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/907"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nNORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ANALYSIS Of DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS District Level FRANC/CAL J JACKSON Director of Student Afjairs DIS0 .. 6/ _/00 ime: 10: ': 35 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions DISTRICT LEVEL From AUGUST Through JUNE 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU --------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 1443 52.3% 718 26.0% 458 16.6% 138 5.0% 2757 604 356 257 95 1312 0 HOME SC' P. 566 66.3% 141 16.5% 125 14.6% 22 2.6% 854 293 90 71 14 468 BOYS CI fB 359 58.2% 148 24.0% 88 14.3% 22 3.6% 617 207 97 68 16 388 2 E. I.C. 211 60.3% 106 30.3% 27 7. 7% 6 1. 7% 350 118 52 24 6 200 EXPULSION 7 63.6% 2 18.2% 1 9.1% 1 9 .1% 11 7 2 1 1 11 ==========================================================================------ 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -=======================================================================-------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU =========================================================================------- S.A.C. 1468 55.0% 662 24.8% 401 15.0% 139 5.2% 2670 615 379 234 85 1313 0 HOME SUSP. 406 63.5% 113 17.7% 102 16.0% 18 2.8% 639 247 75 69 15 406 1 BOYS CLUB 351 58.8% 129 21.6% 90 15 .1% 27 4.5% 597 218 92 67 17 394 E. I. C. 246 61.5% 63 15.8% 75 18.8% 16 4.0% 400 120 40 36 8 204 7 EXPULSION 3 60.0% 0 O!l,.  0 2 40.0% 0 O!l,.  0 5 3 0 2 0 5 ====================================================================---------== COMPARISON -=-==================================================================-------=-== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ===================================================================------------- 9 S.A.C. 25 1.7 % 56- 7.8-% 57- 12.4-% 1 .7 % 87- 11 23 23- 10- 1 HOME SUSP. 160- 28.3-% 28- 19.9-% 23- 18.4-% 4- 18.2-% 215- 46- 15- 2- 1 62- 1 BOYS CLUB 8- 2.2-% 19- 12.8-% 2 2.3 !!,. 0 5 22.7 !!,. 0 20- 11 5- 1- 1 6 2 E. I.C. 35 16.6 % 43- 40.6-% 48 177.8 % 10 166.7 % 50 2 12- 12 2 4 7 EXPULSION 4- 57.1-% 2- 100.0-% 1 100.0 % 1- 100.0-% 6- 4- 2- 1 1- 6- DIS032 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions ~Date: 6/21/00 ELEMENTARY K-5  Time: 10:04:35 From AUGUST Through JUNE --=--===-----------------======================================----============= 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ===============-----BM------==-----BF------==-----NBM-----==-----NBF-----======= # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU \n=\n~~~~~=========\n~====:\n~\n====~~====\n:~\n====~\n====\n~~\n=====\n======~\n====\nHOME SlSP. 11 BOYS c- :.JB E. I.C. EXPULE ON 24 13 12 0 49 374 66.9% 101 18.1% 68 12.2% 16 2.9% 559 202 69 45 12 328 0 . 0% 0 . 0% 0 . 0% 0 . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 211 60.3% 106 30.3% 27 7.7% 6 1.7% 350 118 52 24 6 200 0 Og.. 0 Og.. 0 . 0% 0 . 0% 0  0  0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU ---------- -----------------===================================================- 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME Sl '11 BOYS Cl 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULS: HOME SU BOYS CL 1112 E.I.C. 17 EXPULSI I I ? 3 113 58.5% 58 30.1% 19 9.8% 3 1.6% 54 39 17 2 263 62.9% 80 19.1% 62 14.8% 13 3.1% 171 54 42 11 ... 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 246 61.5% 63 15.8% 75 18.8% 16 4.0% 120 40 36 8 0 .0% 0 Og..  0 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 0 1 0 COMPARISON -----BM-----# REF PCT ( + / - ) # STU -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU 193 112 418 278 0 0 400 204 1 1 ===========================================================--------- 77 213. 9 % 40 222.2 % 0 .0 % 3 300.0 % 120 30 26 5 2 63 111- 29.7-% 21- 20.8-% 6- 8.8-% 3- 18.8-% 141- 31- 15- 3- 1- so- 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .o % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 16.6 % 43- 40.6-% 48 177.8 % 10 166.7 % 50 2 12- 12 2 4 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 1 100.0 % 0 .0 % 1 0 0 1 0 1 ef: DIS032 ate: 6/21/00 'ime: 10:04:36 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions MIDDLE SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through JUNE --------------------------===================================================== 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ------------------------------================================================= -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -----------------------------=--===========================================---= 9 S.A.C. 744 54.3% 353 25.7% 224 16.3% 50 3.6% 1371 316 180 130 35 661 .0 HOME SC.SP. 100 64.5% 23 14.8% 29 18. 7% 3 1. 9% 155 43 10 12 1 66 BOYS C:JB 238 58.2% 107 26.2% 54 13.2% 10 2.4% 409 120 64 37 5 226 2 E. I.C. 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 2 50.0% 1 25.0% 0 09-  0 1 25.0% 4 2 1 0 1 4 ---=======-=-===----------===================================================-=- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----====------------------===============================================------ S.A.C. 652 52.7% 329 26.6% 186 15.0% 71 5.7% 1238 295 185 107 43 630 _o HOME SUSP. 47 52.2% 14 15.6% 28 31.1% 1 1.1% 90 21 9 16 1 47 1 BOYS CLUB 203 54 .1% 98 26 .1% 58 15.5% 16 4.3% 375 116 66 40 9 231 E.I.C. 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 1 100.0% 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 -----===---=====---------==============================================-------- COMPARISON -----==============---=-=================================================------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -----=================================================================---------- 9 S.A.C. 92- 12.4-% 24- 6.8-% 38- 17.0-% 21 42.0 % 133- 21- 5 23- 8 31- HOME SUSP. 53- 53.0-% 9- 39.1-% 1- 3.4-% 2- 66.7-% 65- 22- 1- 4 0 19- 1 BOYS CLUB 35- 14.7-% 9- 8.4-% 4 7.4 9- 0 6 60.0 % 34- 4- 2 3 4 5 2 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 1- 50.0-% 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 1- 100.0-% 3- 1- 1- 0 1- 3- Ref: DIS032 ate: 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:36 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions HIGH SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through JUNE 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU --====-==-----------------------------=========-------================--------- 9 S.A.C. 663 50.5% 347 26.4% 215 16.4% 88 6. 7%- 1313 265 163 115 60 603 0 HOME SUSP. 90 65.2% 17 12.3% 28 20.3% 3 2 . 2 %- 138 47 11 14 1 73 11 BOYS CLUB 121 58.2% 41 19.7% 34 16.3% 12 5.8% 208 87 33 31 11 162 2 E. I.C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 5 71.4% 1 14.3% 1 14.3% 0 0 !1--  0 7 5 1 1 0 7 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -==============-----------===============================================------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ---=======-=====-=----------======================-----==================------- S.A.C. 703 56. 7%- 275 22.2% 196 15.8% 65 5.2% 1239 266 155 110 40 571 0 HOME SUSP. 94 72.9% 19 14 . 7%- 12 9 . 3 %- 4 3 .1%- 129 54 12 11 3 80 1 BOYS CLUB 148 66. 7%- 31 14.0% 32 14.4% 11 5.0% 222 102 26 27 8 163 E. I.C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 2 66. 7%- 0 Og..  0 1 33.3% 0 0!1--  0 3 2 0 1 0 3 -======================================================================-------- COMPARISON ---====================================================================--------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =========================================================================------- 9 S.A.C. 40 6.0 %- 72- 20.7-%- 19- 8.8-%- 23- 26.1-%- 74- 1 8- 5- 20- 32- HOME SUSP. 4 4.4 %- 2 11.8 %- 16- 57.1-%- 1 33.3 %- 9- 7 1 3- 2 7 1 BOYS CLL 27 22.3 %- 10- 24.4-%- 2- 5.9-%- 1- 8 .3-% 14 15 7- 4- 3- 1 2 E. I.C. 0 . 0 %- 0 .0 %- 0 .0 %- 0 .0 %- 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSIC 3- 60.0-%- 1- 100.0-%- 0 .0 %- 0 .0 %- 4- 3- 1- 0 0 4- ef: DIS0 ate: 6/ ime: 10: chool: 3 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 100 by School :36 From AUGUST Through JUNE 2 NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 11/12 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ------------------================================================== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------- ---------------===============================================----=- 09 S.A.C. 138 49.6% 66 23.7% 63 22.7% 11 4.0% 278 92 49 42 10 193 0 HOME Sl. :i 4 36.4% 3 27.3% 4 36.4% 0 0~  0 11 4 2 4 0 10 1 BOYS c 3 33 58.9% 13 23.2% 9 16.1% 1 1.8% 56 24 11 9 1 45 12 E. I.C. 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 1 0~  0 0 0~  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSI N 1 50.0% 0 0~  0 1 50.0% 0 0~  0 2 1 0 1 0 2 ---======-------=----------===============================================------ 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -----==--------------------===============================================------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------------------------==============================================------- S.A.C. 160 47.5% 90 26.7% 63 18.7% 24 7 .1% 337 94 65 44 17 220 HOME SUSP. 7 63.6% 0 0~  0 2 18.2% 2 18.2% 11 5 0 2 2 9 1 BOYS CLUB 44 56.4% 12 15.4% 16 20.5% 6 7.7% 78 34 11 14 4 63 E. I. C 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 1 50.0% 0 0~  0 1 50.0% 0 0~  0 2 1 0 1 0 2 --------------===----------===========================================---------- COMPARISON =---====================================================================-------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---================================================================------------ 9 S.A.C. 22 15.9 % 24 36.4 % 0 . 0 % 13 118.2 % 59 2 16 2 7 27 0 HOME SUSP. 3 75.0 % 3- 100.0-% 2- 50.0-% 2 200.0 % 0 1 2- 2- 2 1- BOYS CLUB 11 33.3 % 1- 7.7-% 7 77.8 % 5 500.0 % 22 10 0 5 3 18 2 E.I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 ef: DIS032S Date: 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:37 chool: 013 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 09/10 ================-==---------------============================================== 1998-.:!9 -----BM------ -BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # EF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # .u # STU # STU ===================-------------- ---------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 505 50.8% 72 27.4% 140 14.1% 77 7.7% 994 166 12 67 51 396 10 HOME SUSP. 4 100.0% 0 OS--  0 0 OS--  0 0 OS--  0 4 2 0 0 0 2 1 BOYS CLUB 88 57.9% 8 18.4% 25 16.4% 11 7.2% 152 64 -'-2 22 10 118 12 E. I.C. 0 OS--  0 0 OS--  0 0 OS--  0 0 OS--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 3 75.0% 1 25.0% 0 OS--  0 0 OS--  0 4 3 1 0 0 4 1999-L.0 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------------=-----------------=========================================----- S.A.C. 538 60.2% 184 20.6% 132 14.8% 40 4.5% 894 170 92 66 23 351 HOME SUSP. 7 58.3% 2 16.7% 3 25.0% 0 OS--  0 12 7 2 3 0 12 1 BOYS CLUB 104 72.2% 19 13. 2% 16 11.1% 5 3.5% 144 68 15 14 5 102 E. I.C 0 OS--  0 0 OS--  0 0 OS--  0 0 OS--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 1 100.0% 0 O!l--  0 0 O!l--  0 0 OS--  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 -----=====-==========-====-=====-=======================================-------- 9 S.A.C. 0 HOME SUSP. BOYS CLUB 2 E. I.C. EXPULSION COMPARISON -----BM------ # REF PCT(+/-) # # STU # 33 6.5 % 4 3 75.0 S-- 0 5 16 18.2 % 4 0 .0 % 0 2- 66.7-% 2- ======================================--------- --BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----~ F PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) ..,U # STU # STU =================================------------- 32.4-% 8- 5.7-% 37- 48.1-% 100- 1- 28- 45- 200.0 % 3 300.0 % 0 .0 % 8 3 0 10 32.1-% 9- 36.0-% 6- 54.5-% 8- 8- 5- 16- .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 3- 0 0 3- ef: DIS032S pate: 6/21/00 i me : 10 : 0 4 : 3 7 chool: 020 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE ARGENTA ACADEMY -----------------------------------=================--==================--====== 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ----------------------------------================---=================---===-== -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -======---------=-----------==================================================== S.A.C. 47 59.5% 14 17. 7% 18 22.8% 0 0 9-  0 79 25 9 11 0 45 0 HOME SUSP. 176 65.2% 35 13.0% 53 19.6% 6 2.2% 270 79 17 22 2 120 1 BOYS CLUB 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C. 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 1 100.0% 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 ---==----------=-----------==================================================== 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 ----------------=------------=-----==============------==================-===--- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------------=------------=-----===============-----======================--= 9 S.A.C. 7 58.3% 3 25.0% 1 8.3% 1 8.3% 12 7 3 1 1 12 HOME SUSP. 126 65.3% 32 16.6% 33 17.1% 2 1.0% 193 62 21 20 1 104 1 BOYS CLUB 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -=--------------=------------==========================-============------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------------=====------=====================================---------------- 9 S.A.C. 40- 85.1-% 11- 78.6-% 17- 94.4-% 1 100.0 % 67- 18- 6- 10- 1 33- 0 HOME SUSP. 50- 28.4-% 3- 8.6-% 20- 37.7-% 4- 66.7-% 77- 17- 4 2- 1- 16- BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 1- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 1- 1- 0 0 0 1- DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:37 School: 024 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE RIDGEROAD MIDDLE SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU =====================-==------===========================================------- S.A.C. 228 56.7% 108 26.9% 57 14.2% 9 2.2% 402 98 56 35 8 197 HOME SUSP. 3 75.0% 1 25.0% 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 4 3 1 0 0 4 11 BOYS CLUB 121 63.4% 46 24.1% 19 9. 9% 5 2.6% 191 54 28 15 3 100 12 E. I.C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 2 66. 7% 1 33.3% 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 3 2 1 0 0 3 =========================================================================------- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ======================================================================---------- 09 S.A.C. 220 55. 7% 82 20.8% 52 13.2% 41 10.4% 395 103 48 31 21 203 10 HOME SUSP. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 1 100.0% 1 0 0 0 1 1 11 BOYS CLUB 119 64.0% 33 17.7% 21 11. 3% 13 7.0% 186 66 23 19 6 114 12 E. I.C 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 1 100.0% 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 -======================================================================----====== COMPARISON ========================================================================-======- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ==================================================================-------------- '09 S.A.C. 8- 3.5-% 26- 24.1-% 5- 8.8-% 32 355.6 g.. 0 7- lf10 5 8- 4- 13 6 HOME SUSP. 3- 100.0-% 1- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 1 100.0 % 3- 3- 1- 0 1 3- 11 BOYS CLUB 2- 1.7-% 13- 28.3-% 2 10.5 % 8 160.0 % 5- 11112 12 5- 4 3 14 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1- 50.0-% 1- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 2- 1- 1- 0 0 2-  DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:37 chool: 025 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE LAKEWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -===========----------------------==--========-==-------=============----------- 9 S.A.C. 129 54.0% 61 25.5% 27 11. 3% 22 9.2% 239 64 32 21 11 128 0 HOME SUSP. 3 100.0% 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 3 3 0 0 0 3 1 BOYS CLUB 42 72 .4% 16 27.6% 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 58 22 9 0 0 31 E. I.C. 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 ==========================================================================------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -=======================================================================-------- 9 S.A.C. 96 45.7% 66 31.4% 41 19.5% 7 3.3% 210 48 37 28 5 118 HOME SUSP. 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 BOYS CLUB 13 35.1% 17 45.9% 6 16.2% 1 2.7% 37 9 12 5 1 27 2 E. I.C 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -======================================================================---====== COMPARISON ==================================================================------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ================================================================--------------- S.A.C. 33- 25.6-% 5 8.2 % 14 51.9 % 15- 68.2-% 29- 16- 5 7 6- 10- 0 HOME SUSP. 3- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 3- 3- 0 0 0 3- BOYS CLUB 29- 69.0-% 1 6.3 % 6 600.0 % 1 100.0 % 21- 13 - 3 5 1 4- 2 E. I.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .o % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS03 ., 6/2 , 00 Time: 10: 0 37 School: C 6 ROSE Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE CITY MIDDLE SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ----------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 134 49.6% 73 27.0% 55 20.4% 8 3.0% 270 62 42 30 6 140 10 HOME sm:?. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 BOYS CL 3 54 43.2% 38 30.4% 28 22.4% 5 4.0% 125 30 21 17 2 70 12 E. I. C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ==========================================================================------ 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 --==========-======--------=============================================-------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------=---=-=-===---------===========================-===============---------- 09 S.A.C. 119 48.4% 62 25.2% 49 19.9% 16 6.5% 246 64 39 20 12 135 10 HOME SUSP. 1 33.3% 0 Og..  0 2 66. 7% 0 Og..  0 3 1 0 2 0 3 11 BOYS CLUB 41 41.8% 30 30.6% 26 26.5% 1 1.0% 98 22 17 13 1 53 12 E. I.C 0 09,  0 0 09,  0 0 09,  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---================================================================-------====== COMPARISON ===================================================================------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # sru #Sru #sru #Sru ==============================================================------------------ 09 S.A.C. 15- 11.2-% 11- 15.1-% 6- 10.9-% 8 100.0 % 24- 2 3- 10- 6 5- 10 HOME SUSP. 1 100.0 % 0 . 0 % 2 200.0 % 0 .0 % 3 1 0 2 0 3 11 BOYS CLUB 13- 24.1-% 8- 21.1-% 2- 7.1-% 4- 80.0-% 27- 8- 4- 4- 1- 17- 12 E. I. C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 g.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 g.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:38 chool: 030 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE POPLAR STREET MIDDLE SCHOOL =======--------===============================================------ 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------- ====-------------=====================-----===============---------- 9 S.A.C. 226 53.6% 106 25.1% 79 18.7% 11 2.6% 422 88 50 42 10 190 0 HOME SUE 0 O!l,-  0 1 100.0% 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 BOYS CLl, 21 60.0% 7 20.0% 7 20.0% 0 O!l,-  0 35 16 7 5 0 28 E. I.C. 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 1 O!l,-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSIO 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 1 100.0% 1 0 0 0 1 1 =============================================================------ 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------- -=======================================-==================--------- 9 S.A.C. 215 56.1% 117 30.5% 44 11. 5% 7 1.8% 383 84 60 28 6 178 HOME susr. 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 BOYS CLU::., 30 55.6% 18 33.3% 5 9.3% 1 1.9% 54 21 14 3 1 39 2 E. I.C 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSIO, 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 O!l,-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 --=================================================================-----======= COMPARISON ===================================================================------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ===============================================================---------------- 9 S.A.C. 11- 4.9-% 11 10.4 % 35- 44.3-% 4- 36.4-% 39- 4- 10 14- 4- 12- 0 HOME SUSP. 0 .0 % 1- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 1- 0 1- 0 0 1- BOYS CLUB 9 42.9 % 11 157.1 % 2- 28.6-% 1 100.0 % 19 5 7 2- 1 11 2 E.I.C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 1- 100.0-% 1- 0 0 0 1- 1- DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:38 chool: 031 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE AMBOY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----=-=-------------------------------=---------------------=======------------ 9 S.A.C. 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 31 86.1% 3 8.3% 2 5.6% 0 0!1--  0 36 16 3 2 0 21 1 BOYS CLUB 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -=====================-===============================================---------- 9 S.A.C. 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 42 75.0% 5 8.9% 7 12.5% 2 3.6% 56 20 5 6 2 33 1 BOYS CLUB 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0!1--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ----===============================================================------------- COMPARISON ---==========================================================--=--------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # ~TU # STU # STU --=============================-========================----------------------- S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 11 35.5 % 2 66.7 % 5 250.0 % 2 200.0 % 20 4 2 4 2 12 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 !1-- 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:38 ::\nchool: 032 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 3 42.9% 0 09--  0 4 57.1% 0 0 9-  0 7 2 0 1 0 3 1 BOYS CLUB 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 09--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 09,  0 0 0 9-  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ==================-=--=================================================-------- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 =========================================================================----=== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU --=======================================================================----==== 9 S.A.C. 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 0 9,  0 0 09--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 1 16.7% 4 66. 7% 1 16. 7% 0 09--  0 6 1 3 1 0 5 1 BOYS CLUB 0 09,  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 09--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -===================================================================------------ COMPARISON ==============================================================----------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =========================================================---------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 2- 66.7-% 4 400.0 % 3- 75.0-% 0 . 0 % 1- 1- 3 0 0 2 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 6/21/00 by School ime: 10:04:38 chool: 033 From AUGUST Through JUNE BOONE PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ----------- 9 S.A.C. 0 HOME SUS 1 BOYS CLl E. I.C. 7 EXPULSI 9 S.A.C. HOME SUS 1 BOYS CLC 2 E.I.C EXPULSIO ---------- 9 S.A.C. 0 HOME SUS BOYS CLU 2 E.I.C. 7 EXPULSIO 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ========------=-===========================================--------- 3 60.0% 1 20.0% 1 20.0% 0 Og..  0 5 3 1 1 0 5 104 82.5% 20 15.9% 0 Og..  0 2 1. 6% 126 57 12 0 1 70 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 09-,  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ===========-===========================-----=-=-=========----------- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 =======================================--=-=--=========-=---------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ======================================================------------- 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 051-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 73.4% 17 26.6% 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 64 31 9 0 0 40 0 Og..  0 0 051-  0 0 Og..  0 0 051-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 82.5% 20 16. 7% 0 Og..  0 1 851-  0 120 53 11 0 1 65 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ===================================================---------------- COMPARISON =================================================------------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =======================================---===---------------------- 3- 100.0-% 1- 100.0-% 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 5- 3- 1- 1- 0 5- 57- 54.8-% 3- 15.0-% 0 .0 % 2- 100.0-% 62- 26- 3- 0 1- 30- 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 . 0 % 20 .0 % 0 .0 % 1 . 0 % 120 99 20 0 1 65 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS032S 6/21/00 10:04:38 035 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 '------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU =================---------------==============----====================---------- S.A.C. 1 100.0% 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 1 1 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 23 65.7% 12 34.3% 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 13 11 0 0 BOYS CLUB 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 115 57.5% 82 41.0% o1 1. 5% 0 0~  0 51 33 3 . 0 EXPULSION 0 0~  0 0 0~  0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 0 ~=====================---===-===================-=====================---------- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -==================-----------================----===================----------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU --=================------------==============----------=--========----------==== S.A.C. 93 66.4% 41 29.3% 6 4.3% 0 Og.  0 140 42 26 5 0 73 HOME SUSP. 21 70.0% 5 16.7% 4 13.3% 0 0 g.  0 30 17 3 2 0 22 BOYS CLUB 0 0 g.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I. C 4 100.0% 0 Og.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 4 4 0 0 0 4 EXPULSION 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---=============================~= ==========================------------------- COMPARISO ==-============================ -----BM------ # REF PCT(+/-) # # STU # ==--=========================== S.A.C. 92 9200.0 % 41 HOME SUSP. 2- 8.7-% 4 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 E. I. C. 111- .0 % 1- EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 =============================------------------ --BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----SF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) TU # STU # STU =========-------------------------------------- 1 4100.0 % 6 600.0 % 0 .0 % 139 5 0 72 7- 58.3-% 4 400.0 % 0 .0 % 5- 3- 2 0 2- J . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 2- .0 % 3- .0 % 0 .0 % 196- 3- 0 83- 1 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 ) 0 0 0 DIS0 6/ Time: 10: School: S Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Joo by School :38 From AUGUST Through JUNE 7 LYNCH DRIVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ----------- =====----------=============================================-------- 09 S.A.C. 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUS 36 80.0% 6 13.3% 2 4.4% 1 2.2% 45 27 5 2 1 35 11 BOYS CLU 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 62 72.1% 15 17.4% 0 5.8% 0 4.7% 86 39 11 5 4 59 17 EXPULSION 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 =========================================================================------- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -==================-==================================-=================-------- -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU ---================------=============================--=-============---------- 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E.I.C 17 EXPULSION 0 0 16 11 0 0 38 24 0 0 09-  0 66.7% 09-  0 73.1% 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 6 25.0% 6 0 0 9-  0 0 11 21. 2% 11 0 09-  0 0 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 1 4.2% 1 4.2% 24 1 1 19 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 3 5.8% 0 09-  0 52 2 0 37 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 ---========= =====------=====================================-----------======-- COMPARISON ---========= =====-=----=================================----------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =--=========== ===================================-=---------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 9- 0 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSI 20- 55.6-% 0 .0 % 1- 50.0-% 0 .0 % 21- 16- 1 1- 0 16- 11 BOYS CLUF 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 24- .0 % 4- .0 % 2- . 0 % 4- .0 % 34- 0 0 2- 4- 22- EXPDLSIO. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 ime: 10: 04: 38 chool: 040 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL =============-------------------================================================ 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ===========----------------------=========================================----- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------------------------------------=======--------===================------- 9 S.A.C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 47 73.4% 6 9.4% 5 7.8% 6 9.4% 64 23 6 4 3 36 1 BOYS CLUB 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E.I.C. 0 O!?-  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 O!?-  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 ---==============---------====--=======================================--------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----===========-------------=-====================-----------=====------------- 9 S.A.C. 2 50.0% 1 25.0% 0 Og..  0 1 25.0% 4 2 1 0 1 4 HOME SUSP. 51 59.3% 14 16.3% 18 20.9% 3 3.5% 86 28 7 7 2 44 1 BOYS CLUB 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 O!?-  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -----==============-----===========================================------------- COMPARISON -----============-----========================================------------=---- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU --===========================================================------------------ 9 S.A.C. 2 200.0 % 1 100.0 % 0 .0 % 1 100.0 % 4 2 1 0 1 4 0 HOME SUSP. 4 8.5 % 8 133.3 % 13 260.0 % 3- 50.0-% 22 5 1 3 1- 8 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 !?- 0 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:38 chool: 041 Analysis o by School From Al NORTH HEIGHTS EL} -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # F # STU # s 8isciplinary Actions DST Through JUNE ENTARY SCHOOL -BF------ -----NBM----- ~ PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT J # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU --------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 Og..  0 J Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 CJ 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 28 50.9% 2 3.6% 24 43.6% 1 1.8% 55 16 2 18 1 37 1 BOYS CLUB 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 10 37.0% 3 11.1% 0 48.1% 0 3.7% 27 9 2 10 1 22 7 EXPULSION 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---==============---------------==============--=========================------ 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ====================----===---==========================================------- 9 S.A.C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 22 52.4% 1 2.4% 13 31.0% 6 14.3% 42 16 1 12 5 34 1 BOYS CLUB 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 105 46.9% 32 14.3% 72 32.1% 15 6.7% 224 40 18 34 7 99 EXPULSION 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ----===============================================================------------- COMPARISON ---=========================================================------------===-=-= -----BM------ --- -BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # R-F PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # s~u # STU # STU -===============================-========================---------------------- S.A.C. 0 . 0 % . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 6- 21.4-% , 50.0-% 11- 45.8-% 5 500.0 % 13- ~ 0 . 6- 4 3- ~ BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % C .0 % 0 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C. 95 .0 g.. 0 29 .0 % 59 . 0 % 14 .0 % 197 10 1 , 59 14 77 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 % . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 DIS03 S ate: 6/2 _/00 i me : 10 : 0 . 3 8 chool: 0%2 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU --============-==----------======================---=====================-==---- 9 S.A.C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 23 67.6% 7 20.6% 2 5.9% 2 5.9% 34 16 5 2 2 25 1 BOYS CLUB 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 05!,,  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -------------=---------------=-=================-===----=================------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ---=======================================================================------ 9 S.A.C. 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 15 55.6% 9 33.3% 3 11.1% 0 Og..  0 27 11 4 2 0 17 1 BOYS CLUB 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 05!,,  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -=----------=======-------=====================================-==----------=--- COMPARISON ----===============================================================------------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =----====================================================---------------------- 9 S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 8- 34.8-% 2 28.6 % 1 50.0 % 2- 100.0-% 7- 5- 1- 0 2- 8- BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:38 chool: 043 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE PARK HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ---===-====--==-------------===================================================- 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ----=-=====--=-------------==================================================== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------=----------------------==============================================-- 9 S.A.C. 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 48 44.4% 33 30.6% 23 21.3% 4 3.7% 108 24 15 12 4 55 1 BOYS CLUB 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 19 59.4% 6 18.8% 0 18.8% 0 3.1% 32 15 6 6 1 28 7 EXPULSION 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------===----=------------========================-=======================-=--- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -------=====-==-=----------========================-=======================----- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----------======---------=========================--====-===============------- 9 S.A.C. 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 20 54 .1% 10 27.0% 7 18.9% 0 O!,.-  0 37 13 9 6 0 28 1 BOYS CLUB 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 O!,.-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -=----=================================================================--------- COMPARISON -=-------==========----=-========================================--------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) #SW # SW #SW #SW ---======= ==========--=--==========================---------------------------- S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SU 28- 58.3-% 23- 69.7-% 16- 69.6-% 4- 100.0-% 71- 11- 6- 6- 4- 27- BOYS CL 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 19- . 0 % 6- .0 % 6- .0 % 1- .0 % 32- 1- 1- 6- 1- 28- EXPULSI 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 i me : l O : O 4 : 3 8 :::\nchool: 044 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE PIKE VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL -----=--------=--==--------===================================================-= l 9 9 8 - 9 9 ---------------------------------=============-=============================--= -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------=------------------==================================================== 9 S.A.C. 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 0 0 s-  0 0 Os-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 17 77.3% 2 9 .1% 3 13. 6% 0 Os-  0 22 12 2 2 0 16 1 BOYS CLJB 0 0 s-  0 0 Os-  0 0 0 s-  0 0 Os-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 4 100.0% 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 4 4 0 0 0 4 7 EXPULSION 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 0 0 s-  0 0 0 s-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ----=---=-----=-----------==============================================------- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 ------=------=====--------===========================-===================------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----=====-=======------==================================================------ 9 S.A.C. 0 0 s-  0 0 0 s-  0 0 0 s-  0 0 Os-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 9 100.0% 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 9 7 0 0 0 7 1 BOYS CLUB 0 0 s-  0 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 0 s-  0 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 0 Os-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 0 s-  0 0 Os-  0 0 0 s-  0 0 0 s-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------===============-==============================================------------ COMPARISON -----=============================================================------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =---=======================================================-------============= S.A.C. 0 .0 s- 0 0 . 0 s- 0 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 8- 47.1-% 2- 100.0-% 3- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 13- 5- 2- 2- 0 9- BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C. 4- .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 4- 1- 0 0 0 4- 7 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS032S ate: 6/21/00 i me : 10 : 0 4 : 3 8 chool: 045 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE BELWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ---============-=----------===================================================== 9 S.A.C. 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 4 50.0% 3 37.5% 1 12.5% 0 O!l-  0 8 1 2 1 0 4 1 BOYS CLUB 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 O!l-  0 0 02,,  0 0 02,,  0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 ---================--------==============================================------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ----====-=======----------==========================--===============-------=-- 9 S.A.C. 0 02,,  0 0 02,,  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 5 62.5% 1 12.5% 2 25.0% 0 02,,  0 8 5 1 2 0 8 1 BOYS CLUB 0 02,,  0 0 02,,  0 0 Og,.  0 0 Og,.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 E. I.C 0 O!l-  0 0 02,,  0 0 Og,.  0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 1 100.0% 0 02,,  0 1 0 0 1 0 1 -----=============-----==========================================--------====--- COMPARISON ---==============================================================--------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) #SW #Sru #Sru #Sru =-=========================================================---------============ S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 1 25.0 % 2- 66.7-% 1 100.0 % 0 .0 % 0 4 1- 1 0 4 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I. C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 1 100.0 % 0 .0 % 1 0 0 1 0 1 Disors ate: 6/2\" loo 'ime: 10:04.38 chool: 046 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE GLENVIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL -----------~-----------------------==============------==================-====== 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 ---------------=------------========================-========================== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -----====-=-----==-=--------=======================---========================== S.A.C. 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 3 60.0% 2 40.0% 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 5 3 2 0 0 5 1 BOYS CLUB 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---------------==----------======================----===================-=----- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -----==---=-----====-------=========================--===================-=-=--- -----BM------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU ---------------==----------======================----=================--------- 9 S.A.C. HOME SUS 1 BOYS CLU- 2 E.I.C EXPULSIC ---======= 9 S.A.C. 0 HOME SUS BOYS CLU_ E. I.C. 7 EXPULSIO! 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 100.0% 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0% 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 O!!-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -=====--------=======================================-------------- COMPARISON ========---========================================---------=------ -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT ( +/-) # REF PCT ( +/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT ( +/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU =============================================-----------====------ 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 !!- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2- 66.7-% 2- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 4- 2- 2- 0 0 4- 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 !!- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 % 0 .0 %- 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 !!- 0 0 .0 !!- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS032S 6/21/00 ime: 10: 04: 38 School: 048 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE INDIAN HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ====================----===========================-================------------ S.A.C. 32 47.8%- 17 25.4%- 18 26. 9%- 0 0 2--  0 67 21 12 11 0 44 HOME SUSP. 7 50.0%- 5 35.7%- 2 14.3%- 0 02--  0 14 5 4 2 0 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 2--  0 0 02--  0 0 02--  0 0 0 2--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 1 100.0%- 0 0 2--  0 0 02--  0 0 0 2--  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 EXPULSION 0 0 2--  0 0 02--  0 0 0 2--  0 0 0 2--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ========================================================================-------- 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -===================--==================================================---===== -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -===================--================================================----====== S.A.C. 18 36.7%- 16 32.7%- 13 26.5%- 2 4 . 1%- 49 10 12 12 1 35 HOME SUSP. 12 46.2%- 7 26.9%- 6 23.1%- 1 3 . 8%- 26 10 7 5 1 23 BOYS CLUB 0 0 2--  0 0 0 2--  0 0 02--  0 0 02--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E.I.C 0 0 2--  0 0 0 2--  0 0 02--  0 0 02--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 0 2--  0 0 0 2--  0 0 O!l,.  0 0 02--  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---========================================================--------------------- COMPARISON --==========================================================--==---------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---======================================================----------------------- S.A.C. 14- 43.8-%- 1- 5.9-%- 5- 27.8-%- 2 200.0 %- 18- 11- 0 1 1 9- HOME SUSP. 5 71.4 %- 2 40.0 %- 4 200.0 %- 1 100.0 %- 12 5 3 3 1 12 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 %- 0 .0 %- 0 . 0 %- 0 .0 %- 0 0 0 0 0 0 E.I.C. 1- . 0 %- 0 .0 %- 0 . 0 %- 0 .0 %- 1- 1- 0 0 0 1- EXPULSION 0 .0 %- 0 .0 %- 0 . 0 %- 0 .0 %- 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIS032S 6/21/00 ime: 10:04:38 chool: 049 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through JUNE REDWOOD PRE-SCHOOL 1 9 9 8 - 9 9 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT #\" REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -===============-==--------------========================================------- S.A.C. 0 09,.  0 0 0 g..  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 2 100.0% 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 2 2 0 0 0 2 BOYS CLUB 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 Og..  0 0 Og..  0 0 09,.  0 0 Og..  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 9 - 0 0 -========================================================================------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU --=================-----=====--========================================--------- S.A.C. 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 O!e-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 3 100.0% 0 O!e-  0 0 O!e-  0 0 O!e-  0 3 2 0 0 0 2 BOYS CLUB 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C 0 Og..  0 0 09,.  0 0 Og..  0 0 09,.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 09,.  0 0 Og..  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 --==================================================================------------ COMPARISON ---=============================================================---------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # R3F PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-} # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # S :'U # STU # STU =-=============================================================-=-============== S.A.C. 0 .0 % .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 1 0 0 0 HOME SUSP. 1 50.0 % .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 1 0 0 0 0 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 NCJrth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions School Year 1999-2000 District Level Elementary Middle Schools High Schools 7 year Comparison Graphs 1 1 1 1 N4t\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level 600-/ .--. 400- v,_ ,c.._ 200- ~- 000- V\"\u0026gt;- 800- v ..... 600- i.-- 400- i.-- 200- vi- 0 - BM D 98-99 1443 D 99-00 1468 Action 09: SAC ~ ~. I!:.-- ,____ - u BF NBM 718 458 662 401 I I NBF 138 139 IL 98-99  99-00 Ne\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level ,Action 10: Home Suspension 600 _,, ,.c:\n500- i,,t- - 400- --~ - 300- v- 98-99  99-00 200 _,,c- FL ~ 100~,,--- ~ I - -:.a 0-. - - ---- I I --.. BM BF NBM NBF 11198-99 566 141 125 22 I  99-00 I 406 113 102 18 Nce\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 11: Boys Club 400-~ - 350-\" L..... 300- 1,- 250- L, '-- 200- 1,/-- 98-99 150- I,~ ~ b  99-00 100- i..,'- ~ 50- 1.,'-- ~ 0 - fl L BM BF NBM NBF ltil 98-99 359 148 88 22 D 99-00 351 129 90 27 Nt:\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Alction 12: Alt School Susp K-5 250- ,.c::::\ne::. 200- 1,1\u0026gt;- 150- ,..~ - ..:::::::.j 98-99 100- i..,t-  99-00 ~ -'-- 50- i,,- ~ ,,c=\n. 0 - ---- - ~ BM BF NBM NBF !D 98-99 211 106 27 6  99-00 246 63 75 16 N,orth Little Rock Public Schools A.nalysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 17: Expulsion 7- ,,c,\n...:.\n:. 6- I\n',- 5- 1,t- 4- .,,- .,,,- - 98-99 3-  99-00 2- 1,,- L- - 1 -1,t- F-- - 0- - - - - - BM BF NBM NBF a 98-99 7 2 1 1 D 99-00 3 0 2 0 N:\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 09: SAC 120-\" ~ 100- so-~ 60-\"' - ~ 98-99  99-00 40_L, - c.::::. 20- L,~ .c=. - I L::::::.i!ll 0 - - - BM BF NBM NBF l'!l 98-99 36 18 19 0 D 99-00 113 58 19 3  II N4:\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 J\"ction 10: Home Suspension 400-\" c::: 350- 1,,I- 300- I,,~ - - 250- ,..,- 200- ~,- 98-99 150- 1,,I-  99-00 100- ~,- ,._ '=- ~ ~ 50- i,t- ,...__ - -- ~ 0 - I ~ BM BF NBM NBF .198-99 374 101 68 16 0 99-00 263 80 62 13 Ne\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 q Action 11: Boys Club II 1 _,, 0.9 _v 0.8 _v 0.7-.., 0.6 _v 0.5 _v 98-99 0.4-,,  99-00 0.3-\" 0.2--- 0.1 _,, 0 BM BF NBM NBF ID 98-99 0 0 0 0 a 99-00 0 0 0 0 II N:\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Alction 12: Alt School Susp K-5 250_/ c::::: C: 200- ,,._ 150- v- 100- i,,- 50- L,- 0- - ..___,_,_ BM la 98-99 211 D 99-00 246 ,.c::::\n- ~ -= BF 106 63 .t::::i .t:=. NBM 27 75 Ff1 NBF 6 16 98-99  99-00 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 17: Expulsion 1 - ,L.._ 0.9-\" 0.8 _,, 0.7--- 0.6 _v 0.5 _v 98-99 0.4-v  99-00 0.3 _,, 0.2-\"' 0.1-  0 - - - - BM BF NBM NBF I  98-99 0 0 0 0 D 99-00 0 0 1 0 N,orth Little Rock Public Schools A.nalysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 09: SAC 800-\" ::: 700- I,,'- - - 600- i,'- 500- i,'- 400-1,, ~ 98-99 ~ 300- i,,'- ~  99-00 200-L, ~ ,___ ~ \u0026gt;--- s-:-: ,__ ,____ \u0026gt;--- 100- i.,'- 0 ._ - Lr=fll. BM BF NBM NBF ID 98-99 744 353 224 50 D 99-00 652 329 186 71 q II N4t\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools ~\"ction 10: Home Suspension 100 _,, ,,c..- 90- v- 80- ..-. 70- v- 60- - I,,,- 50- - - 98-99 40- i,,\u0026gt;-  99-00 30- i,, .... ~ ~ ,.:=\n20- 1,, .... ,___ -.-- 10- .,- - 0 - - --- - - BM BF NBM NBF Im 98-99 100 23 29 3 D 99-00 47 14 28 1 NDrth Little Rock Public Schools A.nalysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools 250-\n200- ,.~ 150- i..,'- 100- ,-'- 50- i..,'- 0 - ID 98-99  99-00 Action 11: Boys Club .::.::: '-- ,_ ..c:::\njl E:,_ - ,_ ~ L\"\"\"\"\"\".:ll - ---- F1 L,. BM BF NBM NBF 238 107 54 10 203 98 58 16 98-99  99-00 Ni\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools A~ction 12: Alt School Susp K-5 1 _,, 0.9 _,, 0.8- 0.7 _,, 0.6 _,, 0.5-\" 98-99 0.4 _v  99-00 0.3 _v 0.2 _v 0.1 - 0 - BM BF NBM NBF ID 98-99 0 0 0 0 D 99-00 0 0 0 0 II N\u0026gt;rth Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools 2-' 1.8- 1\n1- 1.6- 1.,t- 1.4- i,,- 1.2- v\u0026gt;- 1 -1,,\u0026gt;- 0.8- ..-. 0.6- I, 1-- 0.4- ..-. 0.2- ,,- 0 ...., CJ 98-99 D 99-00 Action 17: Expulsion rL- '-- ~ ~ .,__ - - - BM BF NBM NBF 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 - -  98-99 D 99-00 -IIJ II Nc,rth Little Rock Public Schools A1nalysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 09: SAC 800-\" 700 _,, - ~ 600-\n\u0026gt;- 500- v\u0026gt;- 400- v,_ ~ 98-99 300- v- ---  99-00 - 200- v- ~ 100- i,,- 11.. 0- ... BM BF NBM NBF ID 98-99 663 347 215 88 D 99-00 703 275 196 65 Nctrth Little Rock Public Schools A1r1alysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Jlction 10: Home Suspension 1ool ..c:::: 90-\" ~ 80- ...... 70- v- 60- ,,- 50- ...- 40- .,,- 30- i.,\u0026gt;- ,.t::::: 20- ..-. ,, ~ - 10- 1,,- - ..__ .. ..__ A -..., 0- -- BM BF NBM NBF  98-99 90 17 28 3  99-00 94 19 12 4 98-99  99-00 North Little Rock Public Schools Araalysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 11: Boys Club ,\n' ~ ~ -- 160- 140- 120- .,,-z:::: 100- 1, 1-- _.,-- 60- 40- 20 0- - 1,\n'- L,'- ... BM 121 148 -b -- ~ ' I BF NBM NBF 41 34 12 31 32 11 -- L . 98-99 099-00 NCJrth Little Rock Public Schools A11alysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 12: Alt School Susp K-5 1T 0.9j 0.8 _v 0.7 _v 0.6 _v 0.5 _v 98-99 0.4-v  99-00 0.3\" 0.2- 0.1 _,, 0 - - - - BM BF NBM NBF D 98-99 0 0 0 0 D 99-00 0 0 0 0 Ncrth Little Rock Public Schools A1r1alysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 17: Expulsion -r -- _\n-- _..,..- _ 1,1.. ...\n- _v- . ,,-,\n__.\n\u0026gt;- _,-,, '-- - _,\u0026gt;.- - - -- 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 BM BF NBM NBF 5 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 98-99 099-00 North Little Rock Public Schools Aa,1alysis of Disciplinary Actions 7 Year Comparison Action 09: SAC 21000 _________ ___, 1500 93-94 1000  94-95  95-96 500  96-97  97-98 0 BM BF NBM NBF  98-99 1 93-94 977 529 449 156  99-00  94-95 869 460 411 126  95-96 1052 446 410 140  96-97 1264 55 469 142  97-98 1801 862 547 132  98-99 1443 718 458 138  99-00 1468 662 401 139 Nctrth Little Rock Public Schools A1r1alysis of Disciplinary Actions 7 Year Comparison ~lction 10: Home Suspension tSOO !500 ,400 93-94 300  94-95 200  95-96  96-97 100  97-98 0 BM BF NBM NBF  98-99 93-94 231 60 76 22  99-00 D 94-95 236 106 103 20  95-96 162 46 47 3  96-97 591 208 125 17  97-98 511 125 104 13  98-99 566 141 125 22  99-00 406 113 102 18 North Little Rock Public Schools Ar1alysis of Disciplinary Actions 7 Year Comparison Action 11: Boys Club EiOO !iOO ~,oo 93-94 :JOO  94-95 !ZOO  95-96  96-97 100  97-98 0 BM BF NBM NBF  98-99 1J 93-94 119 39 39 9  99-00 [] 94-95 133 44 31 a 1195-96 334 82 72 12 1196-97 357 146 85 20 1197-98 515 148 112 a 1198-99 359 148 88 22 1199-00 351 129 90 27 No,rth Little Rock Public Schools A11alysis of Disciplinary Actions 7 Year Comparison Acction 12: Alt School Susp K-5 2000~------~ 1500 93-94 1000  94-95  95-96 500  96-97  97-98 0 BM BF NBM NBF  98-99 93-94 168 54 45 8  99-00 a 94-95 178 68 58 5  95-96 1563 492 510 71  96-97 154 30 32 3  97-98 0 0 0 0  98-99 211 106 27 6  99-00 246 63 75 16 Nc,rth Little Rock Public Schools A1nalysis of Disciplinary Actions 7 Year Comparison Action 17: Expulsion 8 .....-----------, 6 93-94 4  94-95  95-96 2  96-97  97-98 0 BM BF NBM NBF  98-99 1193-94 6 4 3 0  99-00 ,:J 94-95 7 0 1 0  95-96 2 1 0 2  96-97 3 7 0 0  97-98 6 5 0 0  98-99 7 2 1 1  99-00 3 0 2 0\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_420","title":"Discipline, management 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":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School discipline","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Discipline, management 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/420"],"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\ne, Recidivism Report - Black/White Year: Quarter: Quarter:  Counts Each Student Once I LEVEL SCHQQL BM BF fYM WF QM QF Total Senior High ACC LEARN 3 0 3 1 0 0 7 agencies 10 1 1 0 0 0 12 1 received CENTRAL FAIR 85 31 24 2 0 0 142 112 72 22 14 5 1 226 JUN 212001 HALL 207 93 24 13 16 6 3S9 MCCLELLA 148 99 S 7 4 2 26S OfflCEOF desegregation MONITORING METRO PARKVIEW 25 29 6 9 7 3 0 0 43 8 3 1 0 55 Middle Schoo ALT LEARN 64 24 2 4 CLOVR JR 171 87 11 6 DUNBAR 85 42 16 2 FORST HT 119 64 28 3 HENDERSN 67 42 12 4 Elementary MABELJR MANN M/S PULHTJ SOUTHWST BALE BASELINE BOOKER BRADY CARVER CHICOT DODD FAIR PRK FORST PK FRANKUN Tuesday, May OS, 2001 68 29 19 6 54 19 22 3 31 88 6 3 8 1 15 11 7 3 7 44 57 22 4 59 2 2 1 3 2 4 1 0 1 17 6 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Senior High 1112 1 0 95 10 4 269 0 5 2 2 0 0 2 3 3 1 2 0 0 0 Middle Schoo 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 148 222 128 126 98 164 159 1409 8 5 14 4 17 19 11 4 8 61 Fage I of 2 I I asm SOAS ojni TTOZTZC rvd iT:60 T0/80/S0Recidivism Report - Black/White Year\n Quarter: 1 Quarter\n4 Counts Each Student Once LEVEL SCHQQL BM BF WM WF OM QF Totai Elementary FULBRIGH GEYER SP 13 18 GIBBS 12 18 3 3 1 0 0 0 7 1 4 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 JEFFRSN 9 5 2 0 0 0 16 M U KING 12 0 0 S 2 S 0 MABEL EL 29 10 47 MCDERMOT 19 24 MEADCLIF 13 14 MITCHELL 22 30 5 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 2 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 OTTER CR 0 2 0 1 0 0 3 PULHTE 7 2 0 0 0 0 9 RIGHTSEL 2 2 0 0 0 0 4 ROCKFELR 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 ROMINE 6 4 1 1 0 0 12 0 TERRY 13 23 WAKEFIEL 21 26 1 9 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 WASHNGTN a 0 0 2 0 1 5 0 WATSON 12 17 5 0 0 0 WESTHIL 13 1 0 0 0 3 9 4 0 WILLIAMS 11 17 2 0 0 WILSON 2 3 0 0 0 0 5 WOODRUFF 0 7 4 3 0 0 0 Elementary 487 Tuesday, May OS, 2001 CO asl SOAS OJMI Grand Total 3008 Page 2 af 2 TtOZfZC IVd il-:80 T0/80/S0RECEiVEC APR 6 JffW mwmniiie: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1999-2000 ANNUAL DISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT REPORT TO: FROM: SLTBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 June 28,2000 Dr. Leslie Carnine, Superintendent Linda Watson, Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline 1999-2000 Annual Disciplinary Management Report The following data represents the Annual Disciplinary Management Report for the 1999-2000 school year. A comparative summary of the 1998-99 and 1999-2000 school years is presented. The Discipline Sanctions by Reason Codes and Recidivism Reports for the 1999-2000 school year are also included.1999-2000 ANNUAL DISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT REPORT SUMMARY During the 1999-2000 school year, the Little Rock School District experienced a decrease in the number of disciplinary sanctions issued to students when compared to the 1998- 1999 school year. The data indicates that during the 1998-1999 school year 5312 suspensions were issued when compared to 4926 suspensions during the 1999-2000 school year, which represents a decrease of 386 suspensions. When the 1999-2000 school year was compared to the 1997-1998 school year, there was a noticeable decrease of 1321 suspensions. There were 25,190 students enrolled in the LRSD according to the October 1, 1999, enrollment figure. The recidivism report indicates that only 11.9 percent of the students enrolled in the District received suspensions during the 1999-2000 school year when compared to 12.9 percent during the 1998-1999 school year and 14.5 percent during the 1997-98 school year. 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 Short-term suspensions 5664 4865 4588 Long-term suspensions 474 446 335 Expulsions 109 1 3 TOTALS 6247 5312 4926 Number of students committing offenses 3585(6247) 3237(5312) 3011(4926) The disciplinary report also indicates that fewer than two 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, staff assaults, knives with two and one-half inch blades, handguns, rifles, shotguns, explosives, clubs and gang activity. The District can contribute this success to the establishment of middle schools, which moved the 9* grade students to the high school level and the 6* grade students to the middle school level. The success can also be contributed to the revamping of the Districts Alternative Learning Environments coupled with the implementation of the Accelerated Learning Program at Metropolitan Career and Technical Education Center. The Disciplinary Management Report indicates that the number of students receiving suspensions at the high school level increased. However, the number of studentsreceiving suspension at the middle school and elementary levels decreased, information below represents the nrunber of suspensions for a three-year period: The 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 High Schools 1311 1226 1762 Middle Schools 3455 2976 2505 Elementary Schools 1481 1110 659 TOTALS 6247 5312 4926Name /\\CC LEARN AGENCIES CENTRAL FAIR HALL MCCLELLA METRO PARKVIEW Totals ALT LEARN CLOVR JR DUNBAR FORST HT HENDERSN MABEL JR MANN M/S PULHTJ SOUTHWST Totals BALE BASELINE BOOKER BRADY CARVER CHICOT DODD FAIR PRK FORST PK FRANKLIN School Enrolled 205 118 2045 955 1391 1192 0 1157 7063 63 705 739 785 551 494 842 760 447 5386 312 296 534 348 525 510 203 221 318 485 ITednesday, June 2S, 2000 %Blk 77% 49% 57% 80% 71% 89% 0% 50% 68% 90% 88% 60% 65% 77% 73% 52% 60% 91% 69% 74% 85% 51% 71% 52% 67% 65% 72% 44% 96% LRSD Discipline Management Report 1999/2000 Year Short Term Suspension BM BF IFM T otal 1 0 3 1 5 14 1 1 0 16 136 170 362 218 22 34 957 101 364 144 229 110 97 73 156 169 1443 9 2 7 1 14 10 7 3 12 63 43 103 162 142 8 8 467 37 118 72 105 60 41 31 74 95 633 2 3 1 3 2 4 1 0 1 25 27 33 62 13 3 7 149 7 38 28 55 18 31 25 32 16 250 0 0 5 0 0 3 3 1 0 0 2 20 23 14 0 7 67 9 11 11 6 6 6 3 4 7 63 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 208 326 609 387 33 56 1640 154 531 255 395 194 175 132 266 287 2389 11 5 14 4 16 18 11 4 13 88 Long Term Suspension ! ' ' \"' BM \\bP i lEM I WF Total 2 1 5 14 37 17 1 4 81 14 14 5 7 4 8 5 4 5 66 0 1 1 0 4 3 1 0 0 10 0 1 1 5 3 2 1 1 14 5 5 0 9 1 1 3 3 5 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 0 0 2 1 1 8 7 8 3 0 2 22 0 0 3 2 4 0 1 0 2 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 5 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d 0 0 27 49 22 2 9 Expulsion Recommendation BM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 122 0 20 19 8 18 9 11 9 7 12 113 0 1 1 0 4 3 2 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BF IFM fVF Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total HSiisp 8 18 216 353 658 409 35 65 1762 174 550 263 413 203 186 141 273 302 2505 11 6 15 4 20 21 13 4 13 99 %Blk 38% 94% 86% 83% 86% 93% 91% 72% 86% 90% 91% 84% 85% 86% 79% 79% 87% 92% 87% 100% 100% 60% 100% 100% 81% 69% 75% 100% 100% Page 1 of 2Name FULBRIGH GARLAND GEYER SP GIBBS JEFFRSN M L KING MABEL EL MCDERMOT MEADCLIF MITCHELL OTTER CR PUL HT E RIGHTSEL ROCKFELR ROMINE TERRY WAKEFIEL School Enrolled %Blk 410 267 324 285 370 612 378 373 251 247 349 306 269 401 322 515 334 41% 94% 82% 52% 39% 55% 74% 57% 79% 97% 47% 57% 97% 61% 66% 46% 84% WASHNGTN 543 61% WATSON 445 WEST HIL 255 WILLIAMS 458 WILSON 313 WOODRUFF Totals GTotal 99/00 282 12061 24510 Wednesday, June 28, 2000 LRSD Discipline Management Report 1999/2000 Year Short Term Suspension Long Term Suspension 94% 75% 51% 89% 80% BM 2 0 15 15 11 4 39 66% 67% BF ITM WF j T oial BM T BF IVM IFF Total 3 0 1 4 7 2 4 1 0 6 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0! 0 0 1 4 0 20 1 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 15 30 2 4 0 0 0 2 0 19 22 0 7 1 4 6 23 22 2 10 9 11 4 6 390 2790 1 8 2 1 0 0 4 2 12 1 2 3 0 3 5 109 1209 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 53 452 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 137 21 20 8 60 36 20 31 3 8 1 4 12 31 34 6 12 13 11 7 11 559 4588 4 0 2 7 1 1 7 0 1 1 0 0 2 5 4 2 0 4 1 1 67 214 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 12 58 1 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 21 55l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 14 1 1 7 0 2 3 0 0 8 5 5 5 1 10 1 1 Expulsion Recommendation BM 100 335 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3| 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total WM \\wF j Total itSusp %Blk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T 0 0 8 88% I 0 i -+ 0 ! 0 0 0 0 1 21 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 h 0 i 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 74 37 100% 81% 88% 90% 62% 70% 89% T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 21 38 3 10 4 4 12 39 39 11 17 14 21 8 12 659 4926 100% 97% 67% 100% 100% 100% 83% 69% 100% 64% 100% 93% 81% 100% 100% 88% 87% Page 2 of 2Discipline Sanctions by Reason Code Year: 2000 Quarter: 1 to Quarter: 4 27-Jun-OO Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Senior High ACC LEARN 2 2 2 3 3 3 080 090 115 000 090 091 Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Repeat Violation USE RAP RINGS,CHEMICA Possession of Weapon Possession Weapon/Knife 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 1 1 8 Senior High AGENCIES 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 050 062 040 no 115 121 072 Left School w/o Permission Reftised to obey Rule/Directi Fighting Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Repeated Violation-Smoking Verbal Assault on Staff 1 0 4 7 I 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 7 1 2 2 18 Senior High CENTRAL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 030 050 060 090 no 131 132 133 010 020 030 040 080 090 100 105 no 115 121 122 150 010 072 091 092 120 121 140 Minor Altercation Left School w/o Permission Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to Serve Detention Using Foul or Abusive Langu First Offense Use/Poss Alcoh Use/Poss. Drugs (1st) Repeated School/Class Tardie Assault Battery Theft Fighting Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Repeated Violation-Smoking Forgery/Failure to Provide ID Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs Sale/Distribution of Alcohol Verbal Assault on Staff Possession Weapon/Knife Possession Weapon/Club Inciting to Riot Use of Weapon TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 0 2 1 0 1 5 0 2 4 4 22 2 5 1 2 8 72 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 8 8 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 15 0 0 1 4 4 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 1 1 7 1 4 4 4 38 3 6 3 6 21 94 2 4 3 1 I 1 1 2 1 1 216 Senior High FAIR 1 1 1 2 2 060 062 110 010 020 Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Using Foul or Abusive Langu Assault Battery 1 1 1 6 9 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 2 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 23 14 LRSD Information Services 1Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Senior High FAIR 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 030 040 070 080 090 100 no 115 120 121 122 150 000 010 060 071 072 090 100 121 140 Theft Fighting Loitering / Criminal Tresspas Malicious Mischief! Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Forgery/Failure to Provide ID Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs USE RAP RINGS.CHEMICA Sale/Distribution of Alcohol Arson Physical Assault of Staff Verbal Assault on Staff Possession ofWeapon Poss Fireworks or Explosives Use ofWeapon TERRORISTIC THREATEN! 1 24 4 4 12 2 3 76 1 5 2 18 0 4 1 1 3 0 1 0 4 0 5 5 1 2 0 I 7 1 3 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 21 0 1 8 0 5 38 0 9 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 3 0 2 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 52 11 7 26 2 II 128 2 19 5 20 2 4 1 2 5 2 1 2 8 353 Senior High HALL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 030 040 050 060 062 090 no 131 132 133 010 020 030 040 070 080 090 100 105 110 115 120 121 122 140 150 000 010 071 072 090 091 120 121 Minor Altercation Harrassment Left School w/o Permission Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Refused to Serve Detention Using Foul or Abusive Langu First Offense Use/Poss Alcoh Use/Poss. Drugs (1st) Repeated School/Class Tardie Assault Battery Theft Fighting Loitering / Criminal Tresspas Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten, Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Forgeiy/Failure to Provide ID Possession of Fireworks Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs USE RAP RINGS.CHEMICA Sale/Distribution of Alcohol Physical Assault of Staff Verbal Assault on Staff Possession ofWeapon Possession Weapon/Knife Inciting to Riot Use ofWeapon 1 3 7 1 5 1 4 0 1 33 2 7 2 16 14 1 35 4 43 39 130 I 3 2 2 5 1 3 4 6 1 0 21 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 2 0 2 0 0 5 0 3 2 16 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 I 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 2 0 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 4 0 0 1 3 1 2 1 0 13 0 3 3 14 II 0 14 0 7 19 56 0 2 6 0 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 5 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 7 2 11 3 6 2 1 53 2 12 6 35 27 1 56 5 60 61 219 2 5 12 2 10 2 3 5 9 1 1 27 1 LRSD Information Services 2Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total 658 Senior High MCCLELLA 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 030 040 050 060 062 100 110 132 133 140 010 020 030 040 070 080 090 100 105 no 115 120 150 000 071 072 091 092 120 140 Minor Altercation Harrassment Left School w/o Permission Failure to Follow Rul. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Smoking Using Foul or Abusive Langu Use/Poss. Drugs (1st) Repeated School/Class Tardie Fais, of Info/Records (Elem) Assault Battery Theft Fighting Loitering / Criminal Tresspas Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs USE RAP RINGS,CHEMICA Physical Assault of Staff Verbal Assault on Staff Possession Weapon/Knife Possession Weapon/Club Inciting to Riot TERRORISTIC THREATENI 2 1 23 28 5 2 5 2 17 1 2 6 2 27 6 0 20 1 9 12 42 1 4 1 1 4 3 1 6 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 12 17 3 0 3 0 25 0 4 3 1 31 4 1 10 0 3 1 23 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 40 48 8 2 8 2 43 1 8 9 3 60 II 2 33 2 13 14 71 1 4 1 1 6 5 1 6 2 409 Senior High METRO 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 050 060 062 070 no 010 040 080 090 100 115 120 123 072 140 Left School w/o Permission Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Refused to obey Bus Rules\u0026amp; Using Foul or Abusive Langu Assault Fighting Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Use of Paging Devices Verbal Assault on Staff TERRORISTIC THREATENI 4 3 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 2 1 4 1 5 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 35 Senior High PARKVIEW 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 030 040 090 105 no 115 120 Theft Fighting Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications 3 8 2 3 6 10 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11 8 3 8 12 2 LRSD Information Services 3Level School LvI Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Senior High PARKVIEW 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 121 122 150 072 090 091 140 Repeated Violation-Smoking Forgery/Failure to Provide ID Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs Verbal Assault on Staff Possession of Weapon Possession Weapon/Knife TERRORISTIC THREATENI 2 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 4 2 1 2 4 65 Middle School ALT LEARN 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 030 040 060 062 070 080 090 no 010 020 030 040 070 080 090 100 105 no 115 120 121 123 150 000 071 072 090 091 140 Minor Altercation Harrassment Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Refused to obey Bus Rules\u0026amp; Failure to Serve Detention Refused to Serve Detention Using Foul or Abusive Langu Assault Battery Theft Fighting Loitering / Criminal Tresspas Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Use of Paging Devices Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs USE RAP RINGS,CHEMICA Physical Assault of Staff Verbal Assault on Staff Possession of Weapon Possession Weapon/Knife TERRORISTIC THREATENI 3 0 1 4 1 4 0 3 3 1 1 29 3 2 17 1 9 7 4 5 1 0 2 1 3 3 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 1 1 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 7 1 8 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 Middle School CLOVRJR 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 030 040 050 060 062 070 080 090 no 133 010 020 030 040 050 Minor Altercation Harrassment Left School w/o Permission Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Refused to obey Bus Rules\u0026amp; Failure to Serve Detention Refused to Serve Detention Using Foul or Abusive Langu Repeated School/Class Tardie Assault Battery Theft Fighting Gambling 16 9 13 17 20 1 7 11 5 7 3 3 3 64 1 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 LRSD Information Services Senior High 1762 3 1 5 2 4 0 0 2 4 0 1 1 3 26 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 1 7 3 7 2 7 3 1 1 36 3 2 27 2 20 12 5 5 I 1 3 2 6 3 1 3 5 174 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 10 20 21 26 1 7 14 13 7 4 5 7 105 1 4Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Middle School CLOVRJR 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 080 090 100 105 no 115 120 121 122 150 071 072 090 091 092 140 Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Forgery/Failure to Provide ID Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs Physical Assault of Staff Verbal Assault on Staff Possession of Weapon Possession Weapon/Knife Possession Weapon/Club TERRORISTIC THREATENI 2 18 5 55 23 62 2 16 1 0 2 4 1 2 1 4 1 1 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 26 8 14 1 8 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 27 5 89 32 83 3 24 3 1 3 7 1 2 1 5 550 Middle School DUNBAR 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 030 080 010 020 030 040 060 080 090 100 105 no 115 120 121 122 123 150 000 071 091 100 140 Minor Altercation Failure to Serve Detention Assault Battery Theft Fighting False Alarm Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Forgery/Failure to Provide ID Use of Paging Devices Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs . USE RAP RINGS,CHEMICA Physical Assault of Staff Possession Weapon/Knife Poss Fireworks or Explosives TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 3 8 4 5 47 1 7 7 8 6 4 32 7 2 1 1 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 0 2 1 2 1 1 8 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 29 2 2 5 3 2 3 17 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 I 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 12 10 6 81 3 12 13 13 11 8 63 11 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 263 Middle School FORST HT 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 040 060 062 100 no 132 010 020 030 040 060 080 090 100 105 Harrassment Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Smoking Using Foul or Abusive Langu Use/Poss. Drugs (1st) Assault Battery Theft Fighting False Alarm Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives 0 2 20 0 1 1 10 14 10 70 1 1 8 8 3 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 3 1 13 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 15 0 1 0 2 2 4 25 0 0 5 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 36 1 2 1 13 20 15 114 1 1 19 11 5 LRSD Information Services 5 ILevel School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Middle School FORST HT 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 no 115 120 121 122 140 150 071 090 091 121 140 Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Forgery/Failure to Provide ID Possession of Fireworks Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs Physical Assault of Staff Possession ofWeapon Possession Weapon/Knife Use ofWeapon TERRORISTIC THREATENI 44 31 2 2 0 1 0 3 0 1 1 2 6 11 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 5 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 47 3 2 1 1 4 4 1 4 2 7 413 Middle School HENDERSN 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 030 062 020 030 040 080 090 100 no 115 120 121 150 010 071 072 140 Minor Altercation Refused to obey Rule/Directi Battery Theft Fighting Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs Sale/Distribution of Alcohol Physical Assault of Staff Verbal Assault on Staff TERRORISTIC THREATENI 0 0 6 4 40 1 10 1 2 45 0 1 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 0 8 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 24 0 1 0 0 30 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 5 73 1 13 1 2 86 2 1 1 2 I 2 4 203 Middle School MABEL JR 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 030 040 050 060 062 070 no 133 010 020 030 040 080 090 100 105 no 115 121 150 071 072 091 092 140 Minor Altercation Harrassment Left School w/o Permission Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Refused to obey Bus Rules\u0026amp; Using Foul or Abusive Langu Repeated School/Class Tardie Assault Battery Theft Fighting Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Repeated Violation-Smoking Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs Physical Assault of Staff Verbal Assault on Staff Possession Weapon/Knife Possession Weapon/Club TERRORISTIC THREATENI 2 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 1 3 4 39 1 6 7 1 3 14 2 3 1 2 1 1 3 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 11 0 0 0 0 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 15 0 2 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 1 6 4 2 1 1 1 6 6 73 1 8 7 1 13 30 2 3 1 3 3 1 3 LRSD Information Services 6Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total 186 Middle School MANN M/S 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 010 020 030 040 050 090 100 no 115 120 121 000 072 091 140 Assault Battery Theft Fighting Gambling Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking USE RAP RINGS,CHEMICA Verbal Assault on Staff Possession Weapon/Knife TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 2 1 23 2 1 6 0 34 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 0 1 15 0 1 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 1 1 20 1 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 46 2 2 7 1 63 2 4 2 2 2 3 141 Middle School PUL HT J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 030 040 050 060 062 070 080 090 110 132 133 010 020 030 040 080 090 100 105 110 115 120 121 122 123 150 071 072 091 092 140 Minor Altercation Harrassment Left School w/o Permission Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Refused to obey Bus Rules\u0026amp; Failure to Serve Detention Refused to Serve Detention Using Foul or Abusive Langu Use/Poss. Drugs (1st) Repeated School/Class Tardie Assault Battery Theft Fighting Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Forgery/Failure to Provide ID Use of Paging Devices Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs Physical Assault of Staff Verbal Assault on Staff Possession Weapon/Knife Possession Weapon/Club TERRORISTIC THREATENI 11 0 0 2 2 1 6 1 3 0 2 4 4 8 58 2 4 1 2 1 36 1 6 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 2 15 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 35 0 3 0 1 6 15 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 I 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 1 1 2 2 1 7 1 5 1 2 6 4 16 109 2 8 2 3 7 57 3 7 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 273 Middle School SOUTHWST 1 2 2 2 2 2 132 010 020 030 040 080 Use/Poss. Drugs (1st) Assault Battery Theft Fighting Malicious Mischief / Vandalis 1 5 9 4 67 2 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 51 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 11 4 130 3 LRSD Information Services 7Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Middle School SOUTHWST 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 090 100 105 no 115 120 123 071 . 072 081 091 no 140 Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Use of Paging Devices Physical Assault of Staff Verbal Assault on Staff Possession of Firearm/Pistol Possession Weapon/Knife Extortion, Blackmail, Coercio TERRORISTIC THREATENI 11 10 2 6 50 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 4 16 18 I 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 10 8 22 76 2 1 3 2 3 4 1 2 302 Elementary BALE 1 2 2 060 110 115 Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation 3 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Elementary BASELINE 2 2 3 010 115 071 Assault Repeat Violation Physical Assault of Staff 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Elementary BOOKER 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 060 010 040 100 no 122 072 Failure to Follow Rul. or Dir. Assault Fighting Indecent Exposure Disorderly Conduct Forgeiy/Failure to Provide ID Verbal Assault on Staff 4 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Elementary BRADY 2 2 010 no Assault Disorderly Conduct 1 0 0 0 0 0 Elementary CARVER 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 030 030 040 115 060 071 140 Minor Altercation Theft Fighting Repeat Violation Arson Physical Assault of Staff TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 3 8 2 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Elementary CHICOT 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 040 060 062 030 040 050 no Harrassment Failure to Follow Rul. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Theft Fighting Gambling Disorderly Conduct 1 0 2 I 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Middle School 2505 LRSD Information Services 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 2 11 2 3 1 6 5 3 3 1 1 1 1 15 2 2 4 1 3 10 2 1 I 2 20 1 1 2 1 3 1 3 8Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Elementary CHICOT 2 2 3 3 3 115 120 071 091 092 Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Physical Assault of Staff Possession Weapon/Knife Possession Weapon/Club 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 3 1 1 1 21 Elementary DODD 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 no 010 020 090 105 no 115 121 071 140 Using Foul or Abusive Langu Assault Battery Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Repeated Violation-Smoking Physical Assault of Staff TERRORISTIC THREATENI 0 2 0 1 1 I 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 2 I 1 1 1 1 1 13 Elementary FAIRPRK 2 2 110 115 Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 Elementary FORST PK 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 040 no 010 030 040 100 115 121 Harrassment Using Foul or Abusive Langu Assault Theft Fighting Indecent Exposure Repeat Violation Repeated Violation-Smoking 1 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 4 1 2 I 13 Elementary FRANKLIN 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 050 060 062 070 no 010 030 090 100 105 no 115 120 121 071 091 140 Left School w/o Permission Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Refused to obey Bus Rules\u0026amp; Using Foul or Abusive Langu Assault Theft Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Physical Assault of Staff Possession Weapon/Knife TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 I 1 1 1 6 3 1 1 1 12 22 10 2 4 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 8 9 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 I 7 3 2 1 3 20 31 11 4 4 3 4 99 Elementary FULBRIGH 1 2 2 2 2 060 020 030 040 115 Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Battery Theft Fighting Repeat Violation 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 1 LRSD Information Services 9Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Elementary FULBRIGH 3 091 Possession Weapon/Knife 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 Elementary GARLAND 3 140 TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Elementary GEYER SP 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 010 020 105 110 115 121 071 Assault Battery Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Repeated Violation-Smoking Physical Assault of Staff 0 1 1 4 7 2 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 4 10 2 1 21 Elementary GIBBS 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 030 070 110 040 115 150 000 071 140 Minor Altercation Refused to obey Bus Rules\u0026amp; Using Foul or Abusive Langu Fighting Repeat Violation Poss, or Use Alcohol/Drugs USE RAP RINGS.CHEMICA Physical Assault of Staff TERRORISTIC THREATENI 5 1 0 7 2 0 0 2 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 1 7 2 1 1 2 2 26 Elementary lEFFRSN 1 1 2 2 2 2 030 062 010 040 115 120 Minor Altercation Refused to obey Rule/Directi Assault Fighting Repeat Violation Harassing Communications 0 1 0 5 4 I 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 10 5 1 20 Elementary ML KING 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 060 020 030 040 115 091 140 Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Battery Theft Fighting Repeat Violation Possession Weapon/Knife TERRORISTIC THREATENI 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 3 3 2 13 Elementary MABEL EL 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 030 040 050 060 062 110 010 020 030 040 090 no 115 120 Minor Altercation Harrassment Left School w/o Permission Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Direcb Using Foul or Abusive Langu Assault Battery Theft Fighting Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications 0 3 1 11 6 0 2 1 3 1 2 1 6 1 0 1 0 3 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 1 14 7 1 9 1 4 2 2 2 9 1 LRSD Information Services 10Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Elementary MABEL EL 2 3 3 3 3 3 121 072 090 091 092 140 Repeated Violation-Smoking Verbal Assault on Staff Possession of Weapon Possession Weapon/Knife Possession Weapon/Club TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 2 0 1 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 2 2 2 5 74 Elementary MCDERMOT 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 060 062 040 080 100 115 120 091 Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Fighting Malicious Mischief/Vandalis Indecent Exposure Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Possession Weapon/Knife 1 0 3 2 2 20 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 5 3 2 22 2 1 37 Elementary MEADCLIF 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 010 040 090 105 no 115 092 Assault Fighting Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Possession Weapon/Club 1 2 1 4 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 4 11 1 1 21 Elementary MITCHELL 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 030 040 060 010 030 040 100 105 no 115 120 071 091 140 Minor Altercation Harrassment Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Assault Theft Fighting Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Physical Assault of Staff Possession Weapon/Knife TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 1 0 8 1 1 4 1 3 2 0 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 13 1 1 5 1 3 2 1 1 1 5 38 Elementary OTTER CR 1 2 2 062 010 090 Refused to obey Rule/Directi Assault Non-threaten. Profanity/Staff 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 Elementary PULHTE 1 2 2 2 2 3 040 040 100 105 no 140 Harrassment Fighting Indecent Exposure Refusing to Follow Directives Disorderly Conduct TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 2 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 2 2 10 Elementary RIGHTSEL 2 115 Repeat Violation 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 LRSD Information Services 11Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Elementary RIGHTSEL 3 3 071 140 Physical Assault of Staff TERRORISTIC THREATENI 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 4 Elementary ROCKFELR 1 2 2 040 010 020 Harrassment Assault Battery 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 4 Elementary ROMINE 1 1 2 2 060 062 010 020 Failure to Follow Rul. or Dir, Refused to obey Rule/Directi Assault Battery 1 1 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 8 1 12 Elementary TERRY 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 030 060 062 070 010 030 040 080 100 115 120 121 071 092 140 Minor Altercation Failure to Follow Rul. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Refused to obey Bus Rules\u0026amp; Assault Theft Fighting Malicious Mischief / Vandalis Indecent Exposure Repeat Violation Harassing Communications Repeated Violation-Smoking Physical Assault of Staff Possession Weapon/Club TERRORISTIC THREATENI 5 1 0 1 5 1 1 0 2 6 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 I 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 1 1 6 1 1 2 2 7 2 1 1 1 6 39 Elementary WAKEFIEL 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 no 010 020 040 no 115 121 071 140 Using Foul or Abusive Langu Assault Battery Fighting Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Repeated Violation-Smoking Physical Assault of Staff TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 1 1 10 4 5 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 4 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 I 12 8 9 I 3 2 39 Elementary WASHNGTN 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 010 020 no 091 092 121 140 Assault Battery Disorderly Conduct Possession Weapon/Knife Possession Weapon/Club Use of Weapon TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 11 Elementary WATSON 1 1 2 2 2 060 062 020 030 040 Failure to Follow Rul. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Battery Theft Fighting 1 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 I 2 1 LRSD Information Services 12Level School Lvl Code Offense BM WM OM BF WF OF Total Elementary WATSON 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 100 no 120 071 091 121 140 Indecent Exposure Disorderly Conduct Harassing Communications Physical Assault of Staff Possession Weapon/Knife Use of Weapon TERRORISTIC THREATENI 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 2 1 1 1 2 1 17 Elementary WESTHIL 2 2 2 3 010 105 115 091 Assault Refusing to Follow Directives Repeat Violation Possession Weapon/Knife 1 1 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 9 1 14 Elementary WILLIAMS 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 030 060 062 030 040 115 140 Minor Altercation Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Refused to obey Rule/Directi Theft Fighting Repeat Violation TERRORISTIC THREATENI 4 1 2 2 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 2 2 1 1 10 21 Elementary WILSON 1 1 1 2 2 3 030 040 060 no 115 091 Minor Altercation Harrassment Failure to Follow Rui. or Dir. Disorderly Conduct Repeat Violation Possession Weapon/Knife 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 1 1 8 Elementary WOODRUFF 2 2 2 2 3 020 040 no 121 091 Battery Fighting Disorderly Conduct Repeated Violation-Smoking Possession Weapon/Knife 1 0 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 7 1 1 12 LRSD Information Services Elementary Grand Total: 659 4926 13Recidivism Report Counts each student once per total Year: 2000 Quarter: 1 to Quarter: 4 27-Jun-00 Level School Total Senior High ACC LEARN AGENCIES 7 12 CENTRAL 142 FAIR HALL MCCLELLA METRO 226 359 269 44 PARKVIEW 55 Middle School Elementary Senior High ALT LEARN CLOVR JR DUNBAR FORST HT HENDERSN MABEL JR MANN M/S PULHTJ SOUTHWST Middle School BALE BASELINE BOOKER BRADY CARVER CHICOT DODD FAIR PRK FORST PK FRANKLIN FULBRIGH GARLAND GEYER SP GIBBS JEFFRSN M LKING MABEL EL MCDERMOT MEADCLIF MITCHELL OTTER CR PUL HT E RIGHTSEL ROCKFELR ROMINE TERRY WAKEFIEL WASHNGTN WATSON WESTHIL WILLIAMS LRSD Information Services 1114 94 269 148 222 128 126 98 164 159 1408 8 5 14 4 17 19 II 4 8 61 7 1 18 18 16 12 47 24 14 30 3 9 4 4 12 24 28 8 17 13 17 1Level School Total Elementary WILSON WOODRUFF 5 7 Elementary 489 Grand Total: 3011 LRSD Information Services 2\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\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":"hbcula_abco_0308","title":"Dr. David Buttrick Sermon, circa 1999","collection_id":"hbcula_abco","collection_title":"American Baptist College Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Tennessee, Davidson County, Nashville, 36.16589, -86.78444"],"dcterms_creator":["American Baptist College"],"dc_date":["1999/2009"],"dcterms_description":["This is an audio recording of a sermon from Dr. David Buttrick with the focus of \"Kingdom Parables.\" The entire audio is staticky, and there are only brief words or phrases that can be heard occasionally throughout the audio. Some points of clarity are 3:33 where the sermon begins; at 18:35, where some words can be heard; and 27:08, when the sermon concludes."],"dc_format":["video/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American universities and colleges","African American Baptists","African Americans--Religion","Sermons"],"dcterms_title":["Dr. David Buttrick Sermon, circa 1999"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Library Alliance"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hbcudigitallibrary.auctr.edu/digital/collection/abco/id/0308"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["The Susie McClure Library of American Baptist College believes that the items presented in our digital collections are not encumbered by copyright or related rights. Nonetheless, as these materials are accessible to the public, certain limitations on subsequent usage may be in effect. Authorized uses for these items are confined to research, educational, and scholarly endeavors by U.S. Copyright Law Title 17, §108 U.S.C. In addition to educational purposes, individuals seeking to engage in other forms of utilization must secure explicit permission from the Susie McClure Library by contacting us at 615-687-6935."],"dcterms_medium":["sound recordings"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"hbcula_rwwl_1650","title":"Evelyn G. Lowery: Activist/Advocate, circa 2004","collection_id":"hbcula_rwwl","collection_title":"Digital Collection of Robert W. Wooodruff Library (AUC)","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2009"],"dcterms_description":["This video features a tribute highlighting the many accomplishments of Evelyn G. Lowery as a civil rights activist and as the founder and convener of the SCLC/Women's Organizational Movement for Equality Now (SCLC/W.O.M.E.N.)."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Civil rights","Civil rights movements","African American women social reformers"],"dcterms_title":["Evelyn G. Lowery: Activist/Advocate, circa 2004"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Library Alliance"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hbcudigitallibrary.auctr.edu/digital/collection/rwwl/id/1650"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["All works in this collection either are protected by copyright and/or are the property of the Robert W. Woodruff Library, and/or the copyright holder as appropriate. To order a reproduction or to inquire about permission to publish, please contact the Archives Research Center at: archives@auctr.edu with the web URL or handle identification number."],"dcterms_medium":["born digital"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tmll_hpcrc_69254100","title":"Followup to the report Police-community relations in Reno, Nevada (May 1992)","collection_id":"tmll_hpcrc","collection_title":"Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Nevada, Washoe County, Reno, 39.52963, -119.8138"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Commission on Civil Rights. Nevada Advisory Committee"],"dc_date":["1999"],"dcterms_description":["A digital version of the report published by the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","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":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","Requires Acrobat plug-in to view files."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Police-community relations--Nevada--Reno","Police--Nevada--Reno"],"dcterms_title":["Followup to the report Police-community relations in Reno, Nevada (May 1992)"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Thurgood Marshall Law Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":["http://www2.law.umaryland.edu/Marshall/usccr/documents/cr12p7527z.pdf"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://crdl.usg.edu/id:tmll_hpcrc_69254100"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports","records"],"dcterms_extent":["6 p. ; 28 cm."],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"hbcula_abco_0312","title":"Garnett-Nabrit Lecture Series: Extensive Education Breakfast, circa 1999","collection_id":"hbcula_abco","collection_title":"American Baptist College Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Tennessee, Davidson County, Nashville, 36.16589, -86.78444"],"dcterms_creator":["American Baptist College"],"dc_date":["1999/2009"],"dcterms_description":["This is an audio recording of Rev. Dr. Myron D. Barnes speaking at an Extensive Education Breakfast at American Baptist College. This event is part of a Garnett-Nabrit Lecture Series with the theme: \"Building Vibrant Ministries.\" Rev. Barnes is the Pastor of Bethany Missionary Baptist Church. He preaches on the topic \"The Challenges of Doing a Great Work\" and focuses on the scripture Nehemiah 6:1-3. The audio appears to end at the end of Rev. Barnes' sermon. The volume is low, but audible."],"dc_format":["video/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American universities and colleges","African American Baptists","African Americans--Religion","Sermons","Events and programs"],"dcterms_title":["Garnett-Nabrit Lecture Series: Extensive Education Breakfast, circa 1999"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Library Alliance"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hbcudigitallibrary.auctr.edu/digital/collection/abco/id/0312"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["The Susie McClure Library of American Baptist College believes that the items presented in our digital collections are not encumbered by copyright or related rights. Nonetheless, as these materials are accessible to the public, certain limitations on subsequent usage may be in effect. Authorized uses for these items are confined to research, educational, and scholarly endeavors by U.S. Copyright Law Title 17, §108 U.S.C. In addition to educational purposes, individuals seeking to engage in other forms of utilization must secure explicit permission from the Susie McClure Library by contacting us at 615-687-6935."],"dcterms_medium":["sound recordings"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":408,"next_page":409,"prev_page":407,"total_pages":6797,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":4884,"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}}]}}