{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"geh_vacl_70","title":"Willie Ricks interview (Part 2 of 2)","collection_id":"geh_vacl","collection_title":"Voices Across The Color Line Oral History Collection, 2005-2006","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Atlanta Metropolitan Area, 33.8498, 84.4383"],"dcterms_creator":["Ricks, Willie, 1943-","Merritt, Carole"],"dc_date":["2006-03-16"],"dcterms_description":["In his second interview, Willie Ricks expands on his experiences as a member of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) in Lowndes County, Alabama. He explains how he became SNCC’s minister, a field secretary, how he actively organized demonstrations, and how he helped organize the Lowndes County Freedom Organization. Ricks also describes the different positions about nonviolence among the members of the Civil Rights Movement.","Civil Rights activist, Willie Ricks, also known as Mukasa Dada, was a community organizer, leader, and a member of SNCC. Ricks was born and raised in Chattanooga, Tennessee. His parents were born in a plantation area of Alabama near Muscle Shoals, Alabama. He actively planned and organized sit-ins, marches and public demonstrations throughout Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama and Mississippi."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":["VIS 180.025.002"],"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center, 130 West Paces Ferry RD, Atlanta, GA 30305"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["MSS 990, Voices Across the Color Line oral history transcriptions, Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--History","Civil rights","Racism","Race discrimination","Race relations","African Americans","Police","Police--Georgia","Politics \u0026 government--Georgia","Religion","Education","Transportation","National Association for the Advancement of Colored People","American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia","Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (U.S.)","Southern Christian Leadership Conference","Howard High School (Chattanooga, Tenn.)"],"dcterms_title":["Willie Ricks interview (Part 2 of 2)"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://www.youtube.com/embed/kZpUak4YLyA"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm/ref/collection/VACL/id/70"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S Code) Permission for use must be cleared through The Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":["02:01:42 hours"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Ricks, Willie, 1943-","Vivian, C. T.","King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","Luizzo, Viola","Cooley, John","Bond, Julian, 1940-2015","Bogolman, Dorothy","Bond, Horace Mann, 1904-1972"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"geh_vacl_72","title":"C. T. (Cordy Tindell) Vivian interview (Part 2)","collection_id":"geh_vacl","collection_title":"Voices Across The Color Line Oral History Collection, 2005-2006","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249","United States, Georgia, Atlanta Metropolitan Area, 33.8498, 84.4383"],"dcterms_creator":["Vivian, C. T. (Cordy Tindell), 1924-","Merritt, Carole"],"dc_date":["2006-03-15","2006-04-06","2006-05-02"],"dcterms_description":["In these separate interviews, Reverend C.T. (Cordy Tindell) Vivian discusses his involvement in the Civil Rights Movement during the 1960s. Vivian was involved in civil rights activities throughout several Southern cities. He played a significant role in voters’ registration in Nashville, Tennessee, and the desegregation of the beaches in St. Augustine, Florida. Vivian ends the interview by discussing non-violent themes and how the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) challenged radical violence that was characteristic of Mississippi on a national level.","Dr. Reverend Cordy Tindell Vivian, known as C. T. Vivian (1924- ), was born in Booneville, Missouri. He is a minister, author, and was a close friend and lieutenant of Martin Luther King, Jr. during the Civil Rights Movement. His family moved to Illinois when he was six and they lived in a poor integrated neighborhood. Vivian attended seminary at American Baptist College in Nashville, Tennessee. In 2008, Vivian founded and incorporated the C. T. Vivian Leadership Institute, Inc. (CTVLI) in Atlanta, Georgia. He also received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2013."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":["VIS 180.029.002"],"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center, 130 West Paces Ferry RD, Atlanta, GA 30305"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["MSS 990, Voices Across the Color Line oral history transcriptions, Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--History","Civil rights","Racism","African Americans","Religion","Education","Race discrimination","Race relations","Politics \u0026 government--Georgia","Politics \u0026 government--United States","Lincoln University (Jefferson City, Mo.)","Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (U.S.)","Southern Christian Leadership Conference","Congress of Racial Equality","Western Omaha University","American Baptist Partnering","Jackson Jail","Parksman Prison","United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation","Cosmopolitan Community Church"],"dcterms_title":["C. T. (Cordy Tindell) Vivian interview (Part 2)"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://www.youtube.com/embed/90pfRVwzMpU"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm/ref/collection/VACL/id/72"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S Code) Permission for use must be cleared through The Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":["6:03:57 hours"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Vivian, C. T. (Cordy Tindell), 1924-","Farmer, Jim","Lewis, John, 1940-2020","Carmichael, Stokely, 1941-1998","Lawson, Jim","King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","Loppy, Turner","Hill, Jesse, 1926-2012","Walker, Walter","Cotton, Dorothy F., 1930-2018","Babble, Jim","Orange, James"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_971","title":"'The Status of the North Little Rock School District's Implementation of the Desegregation Plan''","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2006-03-13"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","School discipline","School employees","School enrollment","School facilities","School improvement programs","Student activities","Student assistance programs","Gifted persons","School buildings"],"dcterms_title":["'The Status of the North Little Rock School District's Implementation of the Desegregation Plan''"],"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/971"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) 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\n "},{"id":"nge_ngen_jesse-hill-1927-2012","title":"Jesse Hill (b. 1927)","collection_id":"nge_ngen","collection_title":"New Georgia Encyclopedia","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":["Myers, Barton"],"dc_date":["2006-03-10"],"dcterms_description":["Encyclopedia article about Jesse Hill, a prominent African American civil rights leader in Atlanta, who was the president and chief executive officer of the Atlanta Life Insurance Company from 1973 to 1992. He was the first African American to be elected president of a chamber of commerce in a major city and a member of the board of directors for the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta. He attended Lincoln University in St. Louis and the University of Michigan where he received his MBA. In Atlanta, Hill volunteered for both the Urban League and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. He was also a member of the Atlanta Committee for Cooperative Action.","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.","GSE identifier: SS8E2"],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dcterms_subject":["African American businesspeople--Georgia--Atlanta","African American civil rights workers--Georgia--Atlanta","African American civic leaders--Georgia--Atlanta"],"dcterms_title":["Jesse Hill (b. 1927)"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["New Georgia Encyclopedia (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/business-economy/jesse-hill-1927-2012/"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["If you wish to use content from the NGE site for commercial use, publication, or any purpose other than fair use as defined by law, you must request and receive written permission from the NGE. Such requests may be directed to: Permissions/NGE, University of Georgia Press, 330 Research Drive, Athens, GA 30602."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Cite as: \"Jesse Hill (b. 1927),\" New Georgia Encyclopedia. Retrieved [date]: http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org."],"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["articles"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Hill, Jesse, 1926-2012"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"geh_vacl_71","title":"C. T. (Cordy Tindell) Vivian interview","collection_id":"geh_vacl","collection_title":"Voices Across The Color Line Oral History Collection, 2005-2006","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249","United States, Georgia, Atlanta Metropolitan Area, 33.8498, 84.4383","United States, Illinois, Macomb","United States, Illinois, Peoria County, Peoria, 40.69365, -89.58899","United States, Michigan, Oakland County, Pontiac, 42.63892, -83.29105","United States, Mississippi, Hinds County, Jackson, 32.29876, -90.18481","United States, Missouri, Booneville","United States, Tennessee, Davidson County, Nashville, 36.16589, -86.78444"],"dcterms_creator":["Vivian, C.T. (Cordy Tindell), 1924-","Merritt, Carole"],"dc_date":["2006-03-09"],"dcterms_description":["In this interview, Reverend C.T. (Cordy Tindell) Vivian provides experiences as a child and young adult that encouraged his involvement in the non-violent approach to resistance and change. He describes his first consciousness of race relations, talks about the interrelationships of family, and recalls the reasons why he became a minister. Vivian ends the interview by defining his view of the character of a great leader.","Dr. Reverend Cordy Tindell Vivian, known as C. T. Vivian (1924- ), was born in Booneville, Missouri. He is a minister, author, and was a close friend and lieutenant of Martin Luther King, Jr. during the Civil Rights Movement. His family moved to Illinois when he was six and they lived in a poor integrated neighborhood. Vivian attended seminary at American Baptist College in Nashville, Tennessee. In 2008, Vivian founded and incorporated the C. T. Vivian Leadership Institute, Inc. (CTVLI) in Atlanta, Georgia. He also received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2013."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":["VIS 180.029.001a"],"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center, 130 West Paces Ferry RD, Atlanta, GA 30305"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["MSS 990, Voices Across the Color Line oral history transcriptions, Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--History","Civil rights","Racism","African Americans","Religion","Education","Race discrimination","Race relations","Politics \u0026 government--Georgia","Politics \u0026 government--United States","Lincoln University (Jefferson City, Mo.)","Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (U.S.)","Southern Christian Leadership Conference","Congress of Racial Equality","Western Omaha University","American Baptist Partnering","Jackson Jail","Parksman Prison","United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation","Cosmopolitan Community Church"],"dcterms_title":["C. T. (Cordy Tindell) Vivian interview"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://www.youtube.com/embed/sIybuZxoLV0"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm/ref/collection/VACL/id/71"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S Code) Permission for use must be cleared through The Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":["2:02:43 hours"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Vivian, C. T. (Cordy Tindell), 1924-","Farmer, Jim","Lewis, John, 1940-2020","Carmichael, Stokely, 1941-1998","Lawson, Jim","King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","Loppy, Turner","Hill, Jesse, 1926-2012","Walker, Walter","Cotton, Dorothy F., 1930-2018","Babble, Jim","Orange, James"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"noa_sohpcr_u-0185","title":"Oral history interview with Ted Fillette, March 2, 2006","collection_id":"noa_sohpcr","collection_title":"Oral Histories of the American South: The Civil Rights Movement","dcterms_contributor":["Thuesen, Sarah Caroline","Southern Oral History Program"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, 35.22709, -80.84313"],"dcterms_creator":["Fillette, Ted, 1945-"],"dc_date":["2006-03-02"],"dcterms_description":["This is the first of two interviews with Ted Fillette, a southern lawyer who worked with the Legal Aid Society of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, beginning in the early 1970s. Fillette grew up in Mobile, Alabama, during the late 1940s and 1950s. Fillette begins the interview by describing his lack of awareness regarding the plight of African Americans in his own community, noting that he was a very sheltered child. He describes his limited perception of the civil rights movement during those years, explaining that he was sent to a private and racially segregated military school following the Brown decision. In addition, he describes his understanding of class differences and their intersection with race, an understanding he was able to develop more fully later on when he became more aware of social injustice. Fillette attended Duke University during the mid-1960s, at the height of the civil rights movement and student activism. After hearing Martin Luther King Jr. speak at Duke, Fillette was inspired to take action and become a fervent advocate of the movement. He joined the VISTA program after graduating and was sent to Boston, where he worked with the Massachusetts Welfare Rights Organization. Fillette explains that his experiences with VISTA revealed to him the obstacles facing impoverished people and the importance of legal and political intervention. During the early 1970s, Fillette attended law school at Boston University, spending one summer interning with an ACLU lawyer in Charlotte, North Carolina. After graduating in 1973, Fillette returned to Charlotte to accept a job with the Legal Aid Society of Mecklenburg County. Highly inspired by the strong civil rights advocacy of Judge James McMillan, Fillette became involved in offering legal assistance to people who were displaced by the city's new program of urban renewal. Fillette describes his work on important cases, including the Margaret Green Harris v. HUD case, which resulted in a resolution that displaced people must be offered alternative housing. The interview concludes with his description of his work with Charlotte's Cherry neighborhood during the 1970s, which resulted in finding alternatives to demolition in the form of public housing.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html","text/xml","audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of Oral histories of the American South collection."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Lawyers--North Carolina--Charlotte","Civil rights workers--North Carolina--Charlotte","Urban renewal--North Carolina--Charlotte","Housing--North Carolina--Charlotte","Landlord and tenant--North Carolina--Charlotte","Legal aid--North Carolina--Charlotte","African Americans--Civil rights--North Carolina--Charlotte"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview with Ted Fillette, March 2, 2006"],"dcterms_type":["Text","Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Documenting the American South (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://docsouth.unc.edu/sohp/U-0185/menu.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["transcripts","sound recordings","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["Title from menu page (viewed on December 16, 2008).","Interview participants: Ted Fillette, interviewee; Sarah Thuesen, interviewer.","Duration: 01:21:04.","This electronic edition is part of the UNC-Chapel Hill digital library, Documenting the American South. It is a part of the collection Oral histories of the American South.","Text encoded by Kristin Shaffer. Sound recordings digitized by Aaron Smithers."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Fillette, Ted, 1945-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_103","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["2006-03"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring","School integration--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Project managers--Implements"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/103"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nLittle Rock School District, plaintiff vs. Pulaski County Special School District, defendant\nARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF or. T. Kenneth James, commissioner .Ed U Cat 1 in 4 State Capitol Mall  Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 (501) 682-4475 http://arkedu.state.ar.us March 31, 2006 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Mark Burnette Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. M. Samuel Jones III RECEI'!~ APR -..l 2006 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates \u0026amp; Woodyard 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1800 Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. U.S. District Court No. 4:82-CV-866 WRW  Dear Gentlemen: Per an agreement with the Attorney General's Office, I am filing the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of March 2006 in the above-referenced case.  If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, J~\nGeneral Counsel Arkansas Department of Education SS:law cc: Mark Hagemeier STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION: Chair: Dr. Jeanna Westmoreland, Arkadelphia  Vice Chair: Diane Tatum, Pine Bluff Members: Sherry Burrow, Jonesboro  Shelby Hillman, Carlisle  Dr. Calvin King, Marianna  Randy Lawson, Bentonville  Dr. Ben Mays, Clinton  MaryJane Rebick, Little Rock  Dr. Naccaman Williams, Springdale An Equal Opportunity Employer UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED APR - 3 2006 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. LR-C-82-866 WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of the ADE's Project Management Tool for March 2006. Respectfully Submitted, ~v .. ~mitli, Bar# 92251 General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-4227 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Scott Smith, certify that on March 31, 2006, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Office of Desegregation Monitoring One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates \u0026amp; Woodyard 425 West Capitol, Suite 1800 Little Rock, AR 72201 ~~tts\u0026amp;b Scott Smith IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS RECEIVED APR - 3 2006 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENOR$ KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENOR$ ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education {ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA . {State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS {Continued) B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 C. Process and distribute State MFPA. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 05/06 at Februa D. Determine the number of Magnet students residing in each District and attending a Magnet School. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as ordered by the Court. 2 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS {Continued) E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 e o u It should be noted that currently the Magnet Review Committee is reporting this information instead of the staff attorney as indicated in the Implementation Plan. F. Calculate state aid due the LRSD based upon the Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 G. Process and distribute state aid for Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 H. Calculate the amount of M-to-M incentive money to which each school district is entitled. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Calculated for FY 04/05, subject to periodic adjustments. 3 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS {Continued} I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, September - June. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 J. Districts submit an estimated Magnet and M-to-M transportation budget to ADE. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, December of each year. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 In September 2002, the Magnet and M-to-M transportation budgets for FY 02/03 were submitted to the ADE by the Districts. K. The Coordinator of School Transportation notifies General Finance to pay districts for the Districts' proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 In October 2005, General Finance was notified to pay the third one-third payment for FY 04/05 to the Districts. In October 2005, General Finance was notified to pay the first performing this function instead of Reginald Wilson as indicated in the Implementation Plan. 4 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) L. M. ADE pays districts three equal installments of their proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 In November 2005, General Finance made the last one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 04/05 transportation budget. The budget is now paid out in three equal installments. At November 2005, the following had been paid for FY 04/05: LRSD - $4,143,106.00 NLRSD - $834,966.13 PCSSD - $2,884,201.56 In November 2005, General Finance made the first one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 05/06 transportation budget. The budget is now paid out in three equal installments. At November 2005, the following had been paid for FY 05/06: LRSD - $1,415,633.33 NLRSD - $284,716.52 PCSSD - $974,126.58 ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 5 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) M. ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) In August 1997, the ADE transportation coordinator reviewed each district's Magnet and M-to-M transportation costs for FY 96/97. In July 1998, each district was asked to submit an estimated budget for the 98/99 school year. In September 1998, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 98/99 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. School districts should receive payment by October 1, 1998 In July 1999, each district submitted an estimated budget for the 99/00 school year. In September 1999, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 99/00 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2000, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 00/01 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2001, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 01/02 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2002, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 02/03 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2003, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 03/04 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2004, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 04/05 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In October 2005, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 05/06 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as stated in Exhibit A of the Implementation Plan. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 6 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS {Continued} N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. {Continued} 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued} In FY 94/95, the State purchased 52 buses at a cost of $1,799,431 which were added to or replaced existing Magnet and M-to-M buses in the Districts. The buses were distributed to the Districts as follows: LRSD - 32\nNLRSD - 6\nand PCSSD-14. The ADE purchased 64 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $2,334,800 in FY 95/96. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 45\nNLRSD - 7\nand PCSSD-12. In May 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $646,400. In July 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $624,879. In July 1998, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $695,235. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD-6. Specifications for 16 school buses have been forwarded to state purchasing for bidding in January, 1999 for delivery in July, 1999. In July 1999, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of. $718,355. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD-6. In July 2000, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $724,165. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD-6. The bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was let by State Purchasing on February 22, 2001. The contract was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include two 47 passenger buses for $43,426.00 each and fourteen 65 passenger buses for $44,289.00 each. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8 of the 65 passenger\nNLRSD - 2 of the 65 passenger\nPCSSD - 2 of the 4 7 passenger and 4 of the 65 passenger buses. On August 2, 2001, the ADE took possession of 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses. The total amount paid was $706,898. 7 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS {Continued) N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) In June 2002, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include five 47 passenger buses for $42,155.00 each, ten 65 passenger buses for $43,850.00 each, and one 47 passenger bus with a wheelchair lift for $46,952.00. The total amount was $696,227. In August of 2002, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses. The total amount paid was $696,227. In June 2003, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include 5 - 47 passenger buses for $47,052.00 each, and 11 - 65 passenger buses for $48,895.00 each. The total amount was $773,105. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8 of the 65 passenger\nNLRSD - 2 of the 65 passenger\nPCSSD - 5 of the 47 passenger and 1 of the 65 passenger buses. In June 2004, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The price for the buses was $49,380 each for a total cost of $790,080. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8, NLRSD - 2, and PCSSD - 6. In June 2005, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses for the LRSD include 8 - 65 passenger buses for $53,150.00 each. The buses for the NLRSD include 1 -47 passenger bus for$52, 135.00, and 1 -65 passenger bus for$53, 150.00. The buses for the PCSSD include 6 - 65 passenger buses for $53,150.00 each. The total amount was $849,385.00. 0. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to LRSD as required by page 23 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 and January 1, of each school year through January 1, 1999. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Obligation fulfilled in FY 96/97. 8 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) P. Process and distribute additional payments in lieu of formula to LRSD as required by page 24 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. Q. Process and distribute payments to PCSSD as required by Page 28 of the Settlement Agreement. R. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1994. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Final payment was distributed July 1994. Upon loan request by LRSD accompanied by a promissory note, the ADE makes loans to LRSD. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing through July 1, 1999. See Settlement Agreement page 24. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 The LRSD received $3,000,000 on September 10, 1998. As of this reporting date, the LRSD has received $20,000,000 in loan proceeds. S. Process and distribute payments in lieu of formula to PCSSD required by page 29 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of March 31 , 2006 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. 9 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS {Continued) T. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to NLRSD as required by page 31 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 of each school year through June 30, 1996. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. U. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 98/99. Distribution in July 1999 for FY 99/00 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 99/00. Distribution in July 2000 for FY 00/01 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 00/01. Distribution in August 2001 for FY 01/02 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 01/02. Distribution in July 2002 for FY 02/03 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 02/03. Distribution in July 2003 for FY 03/04 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 03/04. Distribution in July 2004 for FY 04/05 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 04/05. Distribution in July 2005 for FY 05/06 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 05/06. 10 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) V. Process and distribute payments for Office of Desegregation Monitoring. 1. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 98/99. Distribution in July 1999 for FY 99/00 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 99/00. Distribution in July 2000 for FY 00/01 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 00/01. Distribution in August 2001 for FY 01/02 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 01/02. Distribution in July 2002 for FY 02/03 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 02/03. Distribution in July 2003 for FY 03/04 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 03/04. Distribution in July 2004 for FY 04/05 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 04/05. Distribution in July 2005 for FY 05/06 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 05/06. 11 .. II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date January 15, 1995 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 In May 1995, monitors completed the unannounced visits of schools in Pulaski County. The monitoring process involved a qualitative process of document reviews, interviews, and observations. The monitoring focused on progress made since the announced monitoring visits. In June 1995, monitoring data from unannounced visits was included in the July Semiannual Report. Twenty-five per cent of all classrooms were visited, and all of the schools in Pulaski County were monitored. All principals were interviewed to determine any additional progress since the announced visits. The July 1995 Monitoring Report was reviewed by the ADE administrative team, the Arkansas State Board of Education, and the Districts and filed with the Court. The report was formatted in accordance with the Allen Letter. In October 1995, a common terminology was developed by principals from the Districts and the Lead Planning and Desegregation staff to facilitate the monitoring process. The announced monitoring visits began on November 14, 1995 and were completed on January 26, 1996. Copies of the preliminary Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the ADE administrative team and the State Board of Education in January 1996. A report on the current status of the Cycle 5 schools in the ECOE process and their school improvement plans was filed with the Court on February 1, 1996. The unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1996 and ended on May 10, 1996. In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and the data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Districts provided data on enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Districts and the ADE Desegregation Monitoring staff developed a definition for instructional programs. 12 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996 with copies distributed to the parties. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996 and concluded in December 1996. In January 1997, presentations were made to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties to review the draft Semiannual Monitoring Report. The monitoring instrument and process were evaluated for their usefulness in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on achievement disparities. In February 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed. Unannounced monitoring visits began on February 3, 1997 and concluded in May 1997. In March 1997, letters were sent to the Districts regarding data requirements for the July 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and the additional discipline data element that was requested by the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Desegregation data collection workshops were conducted in the Districts from March 28, 1997 to April 7, 1997. A meeting was conducted on April 3, 1997 to finalize plans for the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report. Onsite visits were made to Cycle 1 schools who did not submit accurate and timely data on discipline, M-to-M transfers, and policy. The July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were finalized in June 1997. In July 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were filed with the court, and the ADE sponsored a School Improvement Conference. On July 10, 1997, copies of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were made available to the Districts for their review prior to filing it with the Court. In August 1997, procedures and schedules were organized for the monitoring of the Cycle 2 schools in FY 97/98. 13 11. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION {Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) A Desegregation Monitoring and School Improvement Workshop for the Districts was held on September 10, 1997 to discuss monitoring expectations, instruments, data collection and school improvement visits. On October 9, 1997, a planning meeting was held with the desegregation monitoring staff to discuss deadlines, responsibilities, and strategic planning issues regarding the Semiannual Monitoring Report. Reminder letters were sent to the Cycle 2 principals outlining the data collection deadlines and availability of technical assistance. In October and November 1997, technical assistance visits were conducted, and announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools were completed. In December 1997 and January 1998, technical assistance visits were conducted regarding team visits, technical review recommendations, and consensus building. Copies of the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. The February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report was submitted for review and approval to the State Board of Education, the Director, the Administrative Team, the Attorney General's Office, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process, external team visits and finalizing school improvement plans. On February 18, 1998, the representatives of all parties met to discuss possible revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. Additional meetings will be scheduled. Unannounced monitoring visits were conducted in March 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process and external team visits. In April 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were conducted, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. 14 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued} A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued} 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued} In May 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. On May 18, 1998, the Court granted the ADE relief from its obligation to file the July 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report to develop proposed modifications to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. In June 1998, monitoring information previously submitted by the districts in the Spring of 1998 was reviewed and prepared for historical files and presentation to the Arkansas State Board. Also, in June the following occurred: a) The Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed, b} the Semiannual Monitoring COE Data Report was completed, c) progress reports were submitted from previous cycles, and d.) staff development on assessment (SAT-9) and curriculum alignment was conducted with three supervisors. In July, the Lead Planner provided the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee with (1) a review of the court Order relieving ADE of its obligation to file a July Semiannual Monitoring Report, and (2) an update of ADE's progress toward work with the parties and ODM to develop proposed revisions to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. The Committee encouraged ODM, the parties and the ADE to continue to work toward revision of the monitoring and reporting process. In August 1998, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group metto review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. The Assistant Attorney General, the Assistant Director for Accountability and the Education Lead Planner updated the group on all relevant desegregation legal issues and proposed revisions to monitoring and reporting activities during the quarter. In September 1998, tentative monitoring dates were established and they will be finalized once proposed revisions to the Desegregation Monitoring Plan are finalized and approved. In September/October 1998, progress was being made on the proposed revisions to the monitoring process by committee representatives of all the Parties in the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. While the revised monitoring plan is finalized and approved, the ADE monitoring staff will continue to provide technical assistance to schools upon request. 15 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION {Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) In December 1998, requests were received from schools in PCSSD regarding test score analysis and staff Development. Oak Grove is scheduled for January 21, 1999 and Lawson Elementary is also tentatively scheduled in January. Staff development regarding test score analysis for Oak Grove and Lawson Elementary in the PCSSD has been rescheduled for April 2000. Staff development regarding test score analysis for Oak Grove and Lawson Elementary in the PCSSD was conducted on May 5, 2000 and May 9, 2000 respectively. Staff development regarding classroom management was provided to the Franklin Elementary School in LRSD on November 8, 2000. Staff development regarding ways to improve academic achievement was presented to College Station Elementary in PCSSD on November 22, 2000. On November 1, 2000, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. The Assistant Director for Accountability updated the group on all relevant desegregation legal issues and discussed revisions to monitoring and reporting activities during the quarter. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for February 27, 2001 in room 201-A at the ADE. The Implementation Phase Working Group meeting that was scheduled for February 27 had to be postponed. It will be rescheduled as soon as possible. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting is scheduled for June 27, 2001 . . The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from June 27. It will take place on July 26, 2001 in room 201-A at 1 :30 p.m. at the ADE. 16 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION {Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) On July 26, 2001, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, and Mr. Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 11, 2001 in room 201-A at the ADE. On October 11, 2001, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, discussed the ADE's intent to take a proactive role in Desegregation Monitoring. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 10, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. The Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting that was scheduled for January 10 was postponed. It has been rescheduled for February 14, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. On February 12, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for April 11, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. On April 11, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 11, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. 17 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On July 18, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, talked about section XV in the Project Management Tool (PMT) on Standardized Test Selection to Determine Loan Forgiveness. She said that the goal has been completed, and no additional reporting is required for section XV. Mr. Morris discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. He handed out a Court Order from May 9, 2002, which contained comments from U.S. District Judge Bill Wilson Jr., about hearings on the LRSD request for unitary status. Mr. Morris also handed out a document from the Secretary of Education about the No Child Left Behind Act. There was discussion about how this could have an affect on Desegregation issues. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 10, 2002 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from October 10. It will take place on October 29, 2002 in room 201-A at 1:30 p.m. at the ADE. On October 29, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Meetings with the parties to discuss possible revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan will be postponed by request of the school districts in Pulaski County. Additional meetings could be scheduled after the Desegregation ruling is finalized. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 9, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On January 9, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. No Child Left Behind and the Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD were discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for April 10, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201- A at the ADE. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from April 10. It will take place on April 24, 2003 in room 201-A at 1:30 p.m. at the ADE. 18 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On April 24, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Laws passed by the legislature need to be checked to make sure none of them impede desegregation. Ray Lumpkin was chairman of the last committee to check legislation. Since he left, we will discuss the legislation with Clearence Lovell. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 10, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On August 28, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The LRSD has been instructed to submit evidence showing progress in reducing disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. This is supposed to be done by March of 2004, so that the LRSD can achieve unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 9, 2003 at the ADE. On October 9, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 8, 2004 at the ADE. On October 16, 2003, ADE staff met with the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee at the State Capitol. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, and Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, presented the Chronology of activity by the ADE in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan for the Desegregation Settlement Agreement. They also discussed the role of the ADE Desegregation Monitoring Section. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, and Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, reported on legal issues relating to the Pulaski County Desegregation Case. Ann Marshall shared a history of activities by ODM, and their view of the activity of the school districts in Pulaski County. John Kunkel discussed Desegregation funding by the ADE. 19 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION {Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) On November 4, 2004, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. The ADE is required to check laws that the legislature passes to make sure none of them impede desegregation. Clearance Lovell was chairman of the last committee to check legislation. Since he has retired, the ADE attorney will find out who will be checking the next legislation. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 6, 2005 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On May 3, 2005, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. The PCSSD has petitioned to be released from some desegregation monitoring. There was discussion in the last legislative session that suggested all three districts in Pulaski County should seek unitary status. Legislators also discussed the possibility of having two school districts in Pulaski County instead of three. An Act was passed by the Legislature to conduct a feasability study of having only a north school district and a south school district in Pulaski County. Removing Jacksonville from the PCSSD is also being studied. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 7, 2005 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. 20 Ill. A PETITION FOR ELECTION FOR LRSD WILL BE SUPPORTED SHOULD A MILLAGE BE REQUIRED A. Monitor court pleadings to determine if LRSD has petitioned the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Ongoing. All Court pleadings are monitored monthly. B. Draft and file appropriate pleadings if LRSD petitions the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2.  Actual as of March 31, 2006 To date, no action has been taken by the LRSD. 21 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION A. Using a collaborative approach, immediately identify those laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date December, 1994 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. B. Conduct a review within ADE of existing legislation and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. C. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. Request of the other parties to the Settlement Agreement that they identify laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. D. Submit proposals to the State Board of Education for repeal of those regulations that are confirmed to be impediments to desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. 22 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 A committee within the ADE was formed in May 1995 to review and collect data on existing legislation and regulations identified by the parties as impediments to desegregation. The committee researched the Districts' concerns to determine if any of the rules, regulations, or legislation cited impede desegregation. The legislation cited by the Districts regarding loss funding and worker's compensation were not reviewed because they had already been litigated. In September 1995, the committee reviewed the following statutes, acts, and regulations: Act 113 of 1993\nADE Director's Communication 93-205\nAct 145 of 1989\nADE Director's Memo 91-67\nADE Program Standards Eligibility Criteria for Special Education\nArkansas Codes6-18-206, 6-20-307, 6-20-319, and 6-17- 1506. In October 1995, the individual reports prepared by committee members in their areas of expertise and the data used to support their conclusions were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. A report was prepared and submitted to the State Board of Education in July 1996. The report concluded that none of the items reviewed impeded desegregation. As of February 3, 1997, no laws or regulations have been determined to impede desegregation efforts. Any new education laws enacted during the Arkansas 81 st Legislative Session will be reviewed at the close of the legislative session to ensure that they do not impede desegregation. In April 1997, copies of all laws passed during the 1997 Regular Session of the 81 st General Assembly were requested from the office of the ADE Liaison to the Legislature for distribution to the Districts for their input and review of possible impediments to their desegregation efforts. In August 1997, a meeting to review the statutes passed in the prior legislative session was scheduled for September 9, 1997. 23 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION {Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued} On September 9, 1997, a meeting was held to discuss the review of the statutes passed in the prior legislative session and new ADE regulations. The Districts will be contacted in writing for their input regarding any new laws or regulations that they feel may impede desegregation. Additionally, the Districts will be asked to review their regulations to ensure that they do not impede their desegregation efforts. The committee will convene on December 1, 1997 to review their findings and finalize their report to the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. In October 1997, the Districts were asked to review new regulations and statutes for impediments to their desegregation efforts, and advise the ADE, in writing, if they feel a regulation or statute may impede their desegregation efforts. In October 1997, the Districts were requested to advise the ADE, in writing, no later than November 1, 1997 of any new law that might impede their desegregation efforts. As of November 12, 1997, no written responses were received from the Districts. The ADE concludes that the Districts do not feel that any new law negatively impacts their desegregation efforts. The committee met on December 1, 1997 to discuss their findings regarding statutes and regulations that may impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. The committee concluded that there were no laws or regulations that impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. It was decided that the committee chair would prepare a report of the committee's findings for the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. The committee to review statutes and regulations that impede desegregation is now reviewing proposed bills and regulations, as well as laws that are being signed in, for the current 1999 legislative session. They will continue to do so until the session is over. The committee to review statutes and regulations that impede desegregation will meet on April 26, 1999 at the ADE. The committee met on April 26, 1999 at the ADE. The purpose of the meeting was to identify rules and regulations that might impede desegregation, and review within the existing legislation any regulations that might result in an impediment to desegregation. This is a standing committee that is ongoing and a report will be submitted to the State Board of Education once the process is completed. 24 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION {Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) The committee met on May 24, 1999 at the ADE. The committee was asked to review within the existing legislation any regulations that might result in an impediment to desegregation. The committee determined that Mr. Ray Lumpkin would contact the Pulaski County districts to request written response to any rules, regulations or laws that might impede desegregation. The committee would also collect information and data to prepare a report for the State Board. This will be a standing committee. This data gathering will be ongoing until the final report is given to the State Board. On July 26, 1999, the committee met at the ADE. The committee did not report any laws or regulations that they currently thought would impede desegregation, and are still waiting for a response from the three districts in Pulaski County. The committee met on August 30, 1999 at the ADE to review rules and regulations that might impede desegregation. At that time, there were no laws under review that appeared to impede desegregation. In November, the three districts sent letters to the ADE stating that they have reviewed the laws passed by the 82nd legislative session as well as current rules \u0026amp; regulations and district policies to ensure that they have no ill effect on desegregation efforts. There was some concern from PCSSD concerning a charter school proposal in the Maumelle area. The work of the committee is on-going each month depending on the information that comes before the committee. Any rules, laws or regulations that would_ impede desegregation will be discussed and reported to the State Board of Education. On October 4, 2000, the ADE presented staff development for assistant superintendents in LRSD, NLRSD and PCSSD regarding school laws of Arkansas. The ADE is in the process of forming a committee to review all Rules and Regulations from the ADE and State Laws that might impede desegregation. The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations will review all new laws that might impede desegregation once the 83rd General Assembly has completed this session. The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations will meet for the first time on June 11, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. in room 204-A at the ADE. The committee will review all new laws that might impede desegregation that were passed during the 2001 Legislative Session. 25 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONSTHAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations rescheduled the meeting that was planned for June 11, in order to review new regulations proposed to the State Board of Education. The meeting will take place on July 16, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on July 16, 2001 at the ADE. The following Items were discussed: (1) Review of 2001 state laws which appear to impede desegregation. (2) Review of existing ADE regulations which appear to impede desegregation. (3) Report any laws or regulations found to impede desegregation to the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts. The next meeting will take place on August 27, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on August 27, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. The next meeting will take place on September 10, 2001 in Conference Room 204-B at 2:00 p.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on September 10, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. The next meeting will take place on October 24, 2001 in Conference Room 204-B at 2:00 p.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on October 24, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. On December 17, 2001, the ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation composed letters that will be sent to the school districts in Pulaski County. The letters ask for input regarding any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. Laws to review include those of the 83rd General Assembly, ADE regulations, and regulations of the Districts. 26 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On January 10, 2002, the ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation sent letters to the school districts in Pulaski County. The letters ask for input regarding any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. The districts were asked to respond by March 8, 2002. On March 5, 2002, A letter was sent from the LRSD which mentioned Act 17 48 and Act 1667 passed during the 83111 Legislative Session which may impede desegregation. These laws will be researched to determine if changes need to be made. A letter was sent from the NLRSD on March 19, noting that the district did not find any laws which impede desegregation. On April 26, 2002, A letter was sent for the PCSSD to the ADE, noting that the district did not find any laws which impede desegregation except the \"deannexation\" legislation which the District opposed before the Senate committee. On October 27, 2003, the ADE sent letters to the school districts in Pulaski County asking if there were any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. The districts were asked to review laws passed during the 84th Legislative Session, any new ADE rules or regulations, and district policies. 27 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES A. Through a preamble to the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 The preamble was contained in the Implementation Plan filed with the Court on March 15, 1994. B. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Ongoing C. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement by actions taken by ADE in response to monitoring results. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 Ongoing D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 28 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 At each regular monthly meeting of the State Board of Education, the Board is provided copies of the most recent Project Management Tool (PMT) and an executive summary of the PMT for their review and approval. Only activities that are in addition to the Board's monthly review of the PMT are detailed below. In May 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the total number of schools visited during the monitoring phase and the data collection process. Suggestions were presented to the State Board of Education on how recommendations could be presented in the monitoring reports. In June 1995, an update on the status of the pending Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the State Board of Education. In July 1995, the July Semiannual Monitoring Report was reviewed by the State Board of Education. On August 14, 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the need to increase minority participation in the teacher scholarship program and provided tentative monitoring dates to facilitate reporting requests by the ADE administrative team and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In September 1995, the State Board of Education was advised of a change in the PMT from a table format to a narrative format. The Board was also briefed about a meeting with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring regarding the PMT. In October 1995, the State Board of Education was updated on monitoring timelines. The Board was also informed of a meeting with the parties regarding a review of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and the monitoring process, and the progress of the test validation study. In November 1995, a report was made to the State Board of Education regarding the monitoring schedule and a meeting with the parties concerning the development of a common terminology for monitoring purposes. In December 1995, the State Board of Education was updated regarding announced monitoring visits. In January 1996, copies of the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the State Board of Education. 29 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) During the months of February 1996 through May 1996, the PMT report was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. In June 1996, the State Board of Education was updated on the status of the bias review study. In July 1996, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the Court, the parties, ODM, the State Board of Education, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In August 1996, the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team were provided with copies of the test validation study prepared by Dr. Paul Williams. During the months of September 1996 through December 1996, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. On January 13, 1997, a presentation was made to the State Board of Education regarding the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report, and copies of the report and its executive summary were distributed to all Board members. The Project Management Tool and its executive summary were addressed at the February 10, 1997 State Board of Education meeting regarding the ADE's progress in fulfilling their obligations as set forth in the Implementation Plan. In March 1997, the State Board of Education was notified that historical information in the PMT had been summarized at the direction of the Assistant Attorney General in order to reduce the size and increase the clarity of the report. The Board was updated on the Pulaski County Desegregation Case and reviewed the Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by the Court on February 18, 1997 in response to the Districts' motion for summary judgment on the issue of state funding for teacher retirement matching contributions. During the months of April 1997 through June 1997, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. The State Board of Education received copies of the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and executive summary at the July Board meeting. 30 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regularoversightofthe Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on August 4, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. A special report regarding a historical review of the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement and the ADE's role and monitoring obligations were presented to the State Board of Education on September 8, 1997. Additionally, the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Board for their review. In October 1997, a special draft report regarding disparity in achievement was submitted to the State Board Chairman and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In November 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on November 3, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. In December 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. In January 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and discussed ODM's report on the ADE's monitoring activities and instructed the Director to meet with the parties to discuss revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. In February 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and discussed the February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. In March 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary and was provided an update regarding proposed revisions to the monitoring process. In April 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. In May 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. 31 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) In June 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also reviewed how the ADE would report progress in the PMT concerning revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In July 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also received an update on Test Validation, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee Meeting, and revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In August 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the five discussion points regarding the proposed revisions to the monitoring and reporting process. The Board also reviewed the basic goal of the Minority Recruitment Committee. In September 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed the proposed modifications to the Monitoring plans by reviewing the common core of written response received from the districts. The primary commonalities were (1) Staff Development, (2) Achievement Disparity and (3) Disciplinary Disparity. A meeting of the parties is scheduled to be conducted on Thursday, September 17, 1998. The Board encouraged the Department to identify a deadline for Standardized Test Validation and Test Selection. In October 1998, the Board received the progress report on Proposed Revisions to the Desegregation Monitoring and Reporting Process (see XVIII). The Board also reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. In November, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the proposed revisions in the Desegregation monitoring Process and the update on Test validation and Test Selection provisions of the Settlement Agreement. The Board was also notified that the Implementation Plan Working Committee held its quarterly meeting to review progress and identify quarterly priorities. In December, the State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the joint motion by the ADE, the LRSD, NLRSD, and the PCSSD, to relieve the Department of its obligation to file a February Semiannual Monitoring Report. The Board was also notified that the Joshua lntervenors filed a motion opposing the joint motion. The Board was informed that the ADE was waiting on a response from Court. 32 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES {Continued} D. Through regularoversightofthe Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) In January, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the joint motion of the ADE, LRSD, PCSSD, and NLRSD for an order relieving the ADE of filing a February 1999 Monitoring Report. The motion was granted subject to the following three conditions: (1) notify the Joshua intervenors of all meetings between the parties to discuss proposed changes, (2) file with the Court on or before February 1, 1999, a report detailing the progress made in developing proposed changes and (3) identify ways in which ADE might assist districts in their efforts to improve academic achievement. In February, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was informed that the three conditions: (1) notify the Joshua lntervenors of all meetings between the parties to discuss proposed changes, (2) file with the Court on or before February 1, 1999, a report detailing the progress made in developing proposed changes and (3) identify ways in which ADE might assist districts in their efforts to improve academic achievement had been satisfied. The Joshua lntervenors were invited again to attend the meeting of the parties and they attended on January 13, and January 28, 1999. They are also scheduled to attend on February 17, 1998. The report of progress, a collaborative effort from all parties was presented to court on February 1, 1999. The Board was also informed that additional items were received for inclusion in the revised report, after the deadline for the submission of the progress report and the ADE would: (1) check them for feasibility, and fiscal impact if any, and (2) include the items in future drafts of the report. In March, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received and reviewed the Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Progress Report submitted to Court on February 1, 1999. On April 12, and May 10, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. On June 14, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial. section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. 33 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On July 12, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMTand its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. On August 9, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was also notified that the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan would be ready to submit to the Board for their review \u0026amp; approval as soon as plans were finalized. On September 13, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was also notified that the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan would be ready to submit to the Board for their review \u0026amp; approval as soon as plans were finalized. On October 12, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was notified that on September 21, 1999 that the Office of Education Lead Planning and Desegregation Monitoring meet before the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee and presented them with the draft version of the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan. The State Board was notified that the plan would be submitted for Board review and approval when finalized. On November 8, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 13, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 14, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 13, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. 34 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) On May 8, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 12, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 14, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 11, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 9, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 13, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 11, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 8, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 12, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 12, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 9, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 14, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 11, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. 35 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On July 9, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 13, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 10, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 8, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 19, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 10, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 14, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 11, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 11, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 8, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 13, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 10, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 8, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 12, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. 36 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On September 9, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 14, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 18, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 9, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 13, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 14, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 12, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 9, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On August 11, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of June and July. On September 8, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 13, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. 37 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES {Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued} On January 12, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 9, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 8, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 12, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 10, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 14, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On August 9, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of June and July. On September 12, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 11, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 8, 2004, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On January 10, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of November and December. On February 14, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 14, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 11, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. 38 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On May 9, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 13, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 11, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 8, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 12, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 10, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 14, 2005, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On January 9, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of November and December. On February 13, 2006, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. en March 13, 2006, the Arkansas State Boa~q.efJ\n:Cfucat1on reviewed and aooroved the PMT and its executive summarv for the month of F:ebruarvJ 39 VI. REMEDIATION A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 During May 1995, team visits to Cycle 4 schools were conducted, and plans were developed for reviewing the Cycle 5 schools. In June 1995, the current Extended COE packet was reviewed, and enhancements to the Extended COE packet were prepared. In July 1995, year end reports were finalized by the Pulaski County field service specialists, and plans were finalized for reviewing the draft improvement plans of the Cycle 5 schools. In August 1995, Phase I - Cycle 5 school improvement plans were reviewed. Plans were developed for meeting with the Districts to discuss plans for Phase II - Cycle 1 schools of Extended COE, and a school improvement conference was conducted in Hot Springs. The technical review visits for the FY 95/96 year and the documentation process were also discussed. In October 1995, two computer programs, the Effective Schools Planner and the Effective Schools Research Assistant, were ordered for review, and the first draft of a monitoring checklist for Extended COE was developed. Through the Extended COE process, the field service representatives provided technical assistance based on the needs identified within the Districts from the data gathered. In November 1995, ADE personnel discussed and planned for the FY 95/96 monitoring, and onsite visits were conducted to prepare schools for the FY 95/96 team visits. Technical review visits continued in the Districts. In December 1995, announced monitoring and technical assistance visits were conducted in the Districts. At December 31, 1995, approximately 59% of the schools in the Districts had been monitored. Technical review visits were conducted during January 1996. In February 1996, announced monitoring visits and midyear monitoring reports were completed, and the field service specialists prepared for the spring NCNCOE peer team visits. 40 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) In March 1996, unannounced monitoring visits of Cycle 5 schools commenced, and two-day peer team visits of Cycle 5 schools were conducted. Two-day team visit materials, team lists and reports were prepared. Technical assistance was provided to schools in final preparation for team visits and to schools needing any school improvement information. In April and May 1996, the unannounced monitoring visits were completed. The unannounced monitoring forms were reviewed and included in the July monitoring report. The two-day peer team visits were completed, and annual COE monitoring reports were prepared. In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits of the Cycle 5 schools were completed, and the data was analyzed. The Districts identified enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996, and copies were distributed to the parties. During August 1996, meetings were held with the Districts to discuss the monitoring requirements. Technical assistance meetings with Cycle 1 schools were planned for 96/97. The Districts were requested to record discipline data in accordance with the Allen Letter. In September 1996, recommendations regarding the ADE monitoring schedule for Cycle 1 schools and content layouts of the semiannual report were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. Training materials were developed and schedules outlined for Cycle 1 schools. In October 1996, technical assistance needs were identified and addressed to prepare each school for their team visits. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996. In December 1996, the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools were completed, and technical assistance needs were identified from school site visits. In January 1997, the ECOE monitoring section identified technical assistance needs of the Cycle 1 schools, and the data was reviewed when the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, the State Board of Education, and the parties. 41 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) In February 1997, field service specialists prepared for the peer team visits of the Cycle 1 schools. NCA accreditation reports were presented to the NCA Committee, and NCA reports were prepared for presentation at the April NCA meeting in Chicago. From March to May 1997, 111 visits were made to schools or central offices to work with principals, ECOE steering committees, and designated district personnel concerning school improvement planning. A workshop was conducted on Learning Styles for Geyer Springs Elementary School. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 15-17, 1997. The conference included information on the process of continuous school improvement, results of the first five years of COE, connecting the mission with the school improvement plan, and improving academic performance. Technical assistance needs were evaluated for the FY 97 /98 school year in August 1997. From October 1997 to February 1998, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives. Technical assistance was provided to the Districts through meetings with the ECOE steering committees, assistance in analyzing perceptual surveys, and by providing samples of school improvement plans, Gold File catalogs, and web site addresses to schools visited. Additional technical assistance was provided to the Districts through discussions with the ECOE committees and chairs about the process. In November 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives in conjunction with the announced monitoring visits. Workshops on brainstorming and consensus building and asking strategic questions were held in January and February 1998. In March 1998, the field service representatives conducted ECOE team visits and prepared materials for the NCA workshop. Technical assistance was provided in workshops on the ECOE process and team visits. In April 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process and academically distressed schools. In May 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process, and team visits were conducted. 42 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) In June 1998, the Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 13-15, 1998. Major conference topics included information on the process of continuous school improvement, curriculum alignment, \"Smart Start,\" Distance Learning, using data to improve academic performance, educational technology, and multicultural education. All school districts in Arkansas were invited and representatives from Pulaski County attended. In September 1998, requests for technical assistance were received, visitation schedules were established, and assistance teams began visiting the Districts. Assistance was provided by telephone and on-site visits. The ADE provided inservice training on \"Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement\" at Gibbs Magnet Elementary school on October 5, 1998 at their request. The staff was taught how to increase test scores through data disaggregation, analysis, alignment, longitudinal achievement review, and use of individualized test data by student, teacher, class and content area. Information was also provided regarding the \"Smart Start\" and the \"Academic Distress\" initiatives. On October 20, 1998, ECOE technical assistance was provided to Southwest Jr. High School. B. Identify available resources for providing technical assistance for the specific condition, or circumstances of need, considering resources within ADE and the Districts, and also resources available from outside sources and experts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI. F. of this report. C. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 43 VI. REMEDIATION {Continued) C. D. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 An updated ERIC Search was conducted on May 15, 1995 to locate research on evaluating compensatory education programs. The ADE received the updated ERIC disc that covered material through March 1995. An ERIC search was conducted in September 30, 1996 to identify current research dealing with the evaluation of compensatory education programs, and the articles were reviewed. An ERIC search was conducted in April 1997 to identify current research on compensatory education programs and sent to the Cycle 1 principals and the field service specialists for their use. An Eric search was conducted in October 1998 on the topic of Compensatory Education and related descriptors. The search included articles with publication dates from 1997 through July 1998. Identify and research technical resources available to ADE and the Districts through programs and organizations such as the Desegregation Assistance Center in San Antonio, Texas. 1. Projected Ending Date Summer 1994 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. E. Solicit, obtain, and use available resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. 44 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued} F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 From March 1995 through July 1995, technical assistance and resources were obtained from the following sources: the Southwest Regional Cooperative\nUALR regarding training for monitors\nODM on a project management software\nADHE regarding data review and display\nand Phi Delta Kappa, the Desegregation Assistance Center and the Dawson Cooperative regarding perceptual surveys. Technical assistance was received on the Microsoft Project software in November 1995, and a draft of the PMT report using the new software package was presented to the ADE administrative team for review.  In December 1995, a data manager was hired permanently to provide technical assistance with computer software and hardware. In October 1996, the field service specialists conducted workshops in the Districts to address their technical assistance needs and provided assistance for upcoming team visits. In November and December 1996, the field service specialists addressed technical assistance needs of the schools in the Districts as they were identified and continued to provide technical assistance for the upcoming team visits. In January 1997, a draft of the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties. The ECOE monitoring section of the report included information that identified technical assistance needs and resources available to the Cycle 1 schools. Technical assistance was provided during the January 29-31, 1997 Title I MidWinter Conference. The conference emphasized creating a learning community by building capacity schools to better serve all children and empowering parents to acquire additional skills and knowledge to better support the education of their children. In February 1997, three ADE employees attended the Southeast Regional Conference on Educating Black Children. Participants received training from national experts who outlined specific steps that promote and improve the education of black children. 45 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On March 6-9, 1997, three members of the ADE's Technical Assistance Section attended the National Committee for School Desegregation Conference. The participants received training in strategies for Excellence and Equity: Empowerment and Training for the Future. Specific information was received regarding the current status of court-ordered desegregation, unitary status, and resegregation and distributed to the Districts and ADE personnel. The field service specialists attended workshops in March on ACT testing and school improvement to identify technical assistance resources available to the Districts and the ADE that will facilitate desegregation efforts. ADE personnel attended the Eighth Annual Conference on Middle Level Education in Arkansas presented by the Arkansas Association of Middle Level Education on April 6-8, 1997. The theme of the conference was Sailing Toward New Horizons. In May 1997, the field service specialists attended the NCA annual conference and an inservice session with Mutiu Fagbayi. An Implementation Oversight Committee member participated in the Consolidated COE Plan inservice training. In June and July 1997, field service staff attended an SAT-9 testing workshop and participated in the three-day School Improvement Conference held in Hot Springs. The conference provided the Districts with information on the COE school improvement process, technical assistance on monitoring and assessing achievement, availability of technology for the classroom teacher, and teaching strategies for successful student achievement. In August 1997, field service personnel attended the ASCD Statewide Conference and the AAEA Administrators Conference. On August 18, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held and presentations were made on the Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) program and the Schools of the 21st Century program. In September 1997, technical assistance was provided to the Cycle 2 principals on data collection for onsite and offsite monitoring. ADE personnel attended the Region VI Desegregation Conference in October 1997. Current desegregation and educational equity cases and unitary status issues were the primary focus of the conference. On October 14, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held in Paragould to enable members to observe a 21st Century school and a school that incorporates traditional and multi-age classes in its curriculum. 46 VI. REM ED IA TION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) In November 1997, the field service representatives attended the Governor's Partnership Workshop to discuss how to tie the committee's activities with the ECOE process. In March 1998, the field service representatives attended a school improvement conference and conducted workshops on team building and ECOE team visits. Staff development seminars on Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement are scheduled for March 23, 1998 and March 27, 1998 for the Districts. In April 1998, the Districts participated in an ADE seminar to aid them in evaluating and improving student achievement. In August 1998, the Field Service Staff attended inservice to provide further assistance to schools, i.e., Title I Summer Planning Session, ADE session on Smart Start, and the School Improvement Workshops. All schools and districts in Pulaski County were invited to attend the \"Smart Start\" Summit November 9, 10, and 11 to learn more about strategies to increase student performance. \"Smart Start\" is a standards-driven educational initiative which emphasizes the articulation of clear standards for student achievement and accurate measures of progress against those standards through assessments, staff development and individual school accountability. The Smart Start Initiative focused on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. Representatives from all three districts attended. On January 21, 1998, the ADE provided staff development for the staff at Oak Grove Elementary School designed to assist them with their efforts to improve student achievement. Using achievement data from Oak Grove, educators reviewed trends in achievement data, identified areas of greatest need, and reviewed seven steps for improving student performance. On February 24, 1999, the ADE provided staff development for the administrative staff at Clinton Elementary School regarding analysis of achievement data. On February 15, 1999, staff development was rescheduled for Lawson Elementary School. The staff development program was designed to assist them with their efforts to improve student achievement using achievement data from Lawson, educators reviewed the components of the Arkansas Smart Initiative, trends in achievement data, identified areas of greatest need, and reviewed seven steps for improving student performance. Student Achievement Workshops were rescheduled for Southwest Jr. High in the Little Rock School District, and the Oak Grove Elementary School in the Pulaski County School District. 47 VI. REMEDIATION {Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31 , 2006 {Continued) On April 30, 1999, a Student Achievement Workshop was conducted for Oak Grove Elementary School in PCSSD. The Student Achievement Workshop for Southwest Jr. High in LRSD has been rescheduled. On June 8, 1999, a workshop was presented to representatives from each of the Arkansas Education Service Cooperatives and representatives from each of the three districts in Pulaski County. The workshop detailed the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program {ACTAAP). On June 18, 1999, a workshop was presented to administrators of the NLRSD. The workshop detailed the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program {ACT AAP). On August 16, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program was presented during the preschool staff development activities for teaching assistant in the LRSD. On August 20, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program was presented during the preschool staff development activities for the Accelerated Learning Center in the LRSD. On September 13, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACT AAP program were presented to the staff at Booker T. Washington Magnet Elementary School. On September 27, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was presented to the Middle and High School staffs of the NLRSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On October 26, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was presented to LRSD personnel through a staff development training class. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACT AAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On December 7, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was scheduled for Southwest Middle School in the LRSD. The workshop was also set to cover the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. However, Southwest Middle School administrators had a need to reschedule, therefore the workshop will be rescheduled. 48 VI. REMEDIATION {Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) On January 10, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for both Dr. Martin Luther King Magnet Elementary School \u0026amp; Little Rock Central High School. The workshops also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On March 1, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for all principals and district level administrators in the PCSSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On April 12, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for the LRSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. Targeted staffs from the middle and junior high schools in the three districts in Pulaski County attended the Smart Step Summit on May 1 and May 2. Training was provided regarding the overview of the \"Smart Step\" initiative, \"Standard and Accountability in Action,\" and \"Creating Learning Environments Through Leadership Teams.\" The ADE provided training on the development of alternative assessment September 12-13, 2000. Information was provided regarding the assessment of Special Education and LEP students. Representatives from each district were provided the opportunity to select a team . of educators from each school within the district to participate in professional development regarding Integrating Curriculum and Assessment K-12. The professional development activity was directed by the national consultant, Dr. Heidi Hays Jacobs, on September 14 and 15, 2000. The ADE provided professional development workshops from October 2 through October 13, 2000 regarding, \"The Write Stuff: Curriculum Frameworks, Content Standards and Item Development.\" Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation provided the training. Representatives from each district were provided the opportunity to select a team of educators from each school within the district to participate. The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems by video conference for Special Education and LEP Teachers on November 17, 2000. Also, Alternative Assessment Portfolio System Training was provided for testing coordinators through teleconference broadcast on November 27, 2000. 49 VI. REMEDIATION {Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) On December 12, 2000, the ADE provided training for Test Coordinators on end of course assessments in Geometry and Algebra I Pilot examination. Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation conducted the professional development at the Arkansas Teacher Retirement Building. The ADE presented a one-day training session with Dr. Cecil Reynolds on the Behavior Assessment for Children {BASC). This took place on December 7, 2000 at the NLRSD Administrative Annex. Dr. Reynolds is a practicing clinical psychologist. He is also a professor at Texas A \u0026amp; M University and a nationally known author. In the training, Dr. Reynolds addressed the following: 1) how to use and interpret information obtained on the direct observation form, 2) how to use this information for programming, 3) when to use the BASC, 4) when to refer for more or additional testing or evaluation, 5) who should complete the forms and when, {i.e., parents, teachers, students), 6) how to correctly interpret scores. This training was intended to especially benefit School Psychology Specialists, psychologists, psychological examiners, educational examiners and counselors. During January 22-26, 2001 the ADE presented the ACTAAP Intermediate {Grade 6) Benchmark Professional Development Workshop on Item Writing. Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation provided the training. Representatives from each district were invited to attend. On January 12, 2001 the ADE presented test administrators training for mid-year End of Course {Pilot) Algebra I and Geometry exams. This was provided for schools with block scheduling. On January 13, 2001 the ADE presented SmartScience Lessons and worked with teachers to produce curriculum. This was shared with eight Master Teachers. The SmartScience Lessons were developed by the Arkansas Science Teachers Association in conjunction with the Wilbur Mills Educational Cooperative under an Eisenhower grant provided by the ADE. The purpose of SmartScience is to provide K-6 teachers with activity-oriented science lessons that incorporate reading, writing, and mathematics skills. The following training has been provided for educators in the three districts in Pulaski County by the Division of Special Education at the ADE since January 2000: On January 6, 2000, training was conducted for the Shannon Hills Pre-school Program, entitled \"Things you can do at home to support your child's learning.\" This was presented by Don Boyd - ASERC and Shelley Weir. The school's director and seven parents attended. 50 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On March 8, 2000, training was conducted for the Southwest Middle School in Little Rock, on ADD. Six people attended the training. There was follow-up training on Learning and Reading Styles on March 26. This was presented by Don Boyd - ASERC and Shelley Weir. On September 7, 2000, Autism and Classroom Accommodations for the LRSD at Chicot Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and ShelleyWeirwere presenters. The participants were: Karen Sabo, Kindergarten Teacher\nMelissa Gleason, Paraprofessional\nCurtis Mayfield, P.E. Teacher\nLisa Poteet, Speech Language Pathologist\nJane Harkey, Principal\nKathy Penn-Norman, Special Education Coordinator\nAlice Phillips, Occupational Therapist. On September 15, 2000, the Governor's Developmental Disability Coalition Conference presented Assistive Technology Devices \u0026amp; Services. This was held at the Arlington Hotel in Hot Springs. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On September 19, 2000, Autism and Classroom Accommodations for the LRSD at Jefferson Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Melissa Chaney, Special Education Teacher\nBarbara Barnes, Special Education Coordinator\na Principal, a Counselor, a Librarian, and a Paraprofessional. On October 6, 2000, Integrating Assistive Technology Into Curriculum was presented at a conference in the Hot Springs Convention Center. Presenters were: Bryan Ayers and Aleecia Starkey. Speech Language Pathologists from LRSD and NLRSD attended. On October 24, 2000, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On October 25 and 26, 2000, Alternate Assessment for Students with Severe Disabilities for the LRSD at J. A. Fair High School was presented. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. The participants were: Susan Chapman, Special Education Coordinator\nMary Steele, Special Education Teacher\nDenise Nesbit, Speech Language Pathologist\nand three Paraprofessionals. On November 14, 2000, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On November 17, 2000, training was conducted on Autism for the LRSD at the Instructional Resource Center. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. 51 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On December 5, 2000, Access to the Curriculum Via the use of Assistive Technology Computer Lab was presented. Bryan Ayres was the presenter of this teleconference. The participants were: Tim Fisk, Speech Language Pathologist from Arch Ford Education Service Cooperative at Plumerville and Patsy Lewis, Special Education Teacher from Mabelvale Middle School in the LRSD. On January 9, 2001, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. Kathy Brown, a vision consultant from the LRSD, was a participant. On January 23, 2001, Autism and Classroom Modifications for the LRSD at Brady Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Beverly Cook, Special Education Teacher\nAmy Littrell, Speech Language Pathologist\nJan Feurig, Occupational Therapist\nCarolyn James, Paraprofessional\nCindy Kackly, Paraprofessional\nand Rita Deloney, Paraprofessional. The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems for Special Education and Limited English Proficient students through teleconference broadcast on February 5, 2001. Presenters were: Charlotte Marvel, ADE\nDr. Gayle Potter, ADE\nMarcia Harding, ADE\nLynn Springfield, ASERC\nMary Steele, J. A. Fair High School, LRSD\nBryan Ayres, Easter Seals Outreach. This was provided for Special Education teachers and supervisors in the morning, and Limited English Proficient teachers and supervisors in the afternoon. The Special Education session was attended by 29 teachers/administrators and provided answers to specific questions about the alternate assessment portfolio system and the scoring rubric and points on the rubric to be used to score the portfolios. The LEP session was attended by 16 teachers/administrators and disseminated the common tasks to be included in the portfolios: one each in mathematics, writing and reading. On February 12-23, 2001, the ADE and Data Recognition Corporation personnel trained Test Coordinators in the administration of the spring Criterion-Referenced Test. This was provided in 20 sessions at 10 regional sites. Testing protocol, released items, and other testing materials were presented and discussed. The sessions provided training for Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Pilot Tests. The LRSD had 2 in attendance for the End of Course session and 2 for the Benchmark session. The NLRSD had 1 in attendance for the End of Course session and 1 for the Benchmark session. The PCSSD had 1 in attendance for the End of Course session and 1 for the Benchmark session. 52 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On March 15, 2001, there was a meeting at the ADE to plan professional development for staff who work with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students. A $30,000 grant has been created to provide LEP training at Chicot Elementary for a year, starting in April 2001. A $40,000 grant was created to provide a Summer English as Second Language (ESL) Academy for the LRSD from June 18 through 29, 2001. Andre Guerrero from the ADE Accountability section met with Karen Broadnax, ESL Coordinator at LRSD, Pat Price, Early Childhood Curriculum Supervisor at LRSD, and Jane Harkey, Principal of Chicot Elementary. On March 1-2 and 8-29, 2001, ADE staff performed the following activities: processed registration for April 2 and 3 Alternate Portfolio Assessment video conference quarterly meeting\nanswered questions about Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) and LEP Alternate Portfolio Assessment by phone from schools and Education Service Cooperatives\nand signed up students for  alternate portfolio assessment from school districts. On March 6, 2001, ADE staff attended a Smart Step Technology Leadership Conference at the State House Convention Center. On March 7, 2001, ADE staff attended a National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Regional Math Framework Meeting about the Consensus Project 2004. On March 8, 2001, there was a one-on-one conference with Carole Villarreal from Pulaski County at the ADE about the LEP students with portfolios. She was given pertinent data, including all the materials that have been given out at the video conferences. The conference lasted for at least an hour. On March 14, 2001, a Test Administrator's Training Session was presented specifically to LRSD Test Coordinators and Principals. About 60 LRSD personnel attended. The following meetings have been conducted with educators in the three districts in Pulaski County since July 2000. On July 10-13, 2000 the ADE provided Smart Step training. The sessions covered Standards-based classroom practices. 53 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued} F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) On July 19-21, 2000 the ADE held the Math/Science Leadership Conference at UCA. This provided services for Arkansas muth and science teachers to support  systemic reform in math/science and training for 8th grade Benchmark. There were 200 teachers from across the state in attendance. On August 14-31, 2000 the ADE presented Science Smart Start Lessons and worked with teachers to produce curriculum. This will provide K-6 teachers with activity-oriented science lessons that incorporate reading, writing, and mathematics skills. On September 5, 2000 the ADE held an Eisenhower Informational meeting with Teacher Center Coordinators. The purpose of the Eisenhower Professional Development Program is to prepare teachers, school staff, and administrators to help all students meet challenging standards in the core academic subjects. A summary of the program was presented at the meeting. On November 2-3, 2000 the ADE heldthe Arkansas Conference on Teaching. This presented curriculum and activity workshops. More than 1200 attended the conference. On November 6, 2000 there was a review of Science Benchmarks and sample model curriculum. A committee of 6 reviewed and revised a drafted document. The committee was made up of ADE and K-8 teachers. On November 7-10, 2000 the ADE held a meeting of the Benchmark and End of Course Mathematics Content Area Committee. Classroom teachers reviewed items for grades 4, 6, 8 and EOC mathematics assessment. There were 60 participants. On December 4-8, 2000 the ADE conducted grades 4 and 8 Benchmark Scoring for Writing Assessment. This professional development was attended by approximately 750 teachers. On December 8, 2000 the ADE conducted Rubric development for Special Education Portfolio scoring. This was a meeting with special education supervisors to revise rubric and plan for scoring in June. On December 8, 2000 the ADE presented the Transition Mathematics Pilot Training Workshop. This provided follow-up training and activities for fourth-year mathematics professional development. On December 12, 2000 the ADE presented test administrators training for midyear End of Course (Pilot) Algebra I and Geometry exams. This was provided for schools with block scheduling. 54 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems for Special Education and Limited English Proficient students through teleconference broadcasts on April 2-3, 2001. Administration of the Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy took place on April 23-27, 2001. Administration of the End of Course Algebra and Geometry Exams took place on May 2-3, 2001. Over 1,100 Arkansas educators attended the Smart Step Growing Smarter Conference on July 10 and 11, 2001, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center. Smart Step focuses on improving student achievement for Grades 5-8. The Smart Step effort seeks to provide intense professional development for teachers and administrators at the middle school level, as well as additional materials and assistance to the state's middle school teachers. The event began with opening remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. Carl Boyd, a longtime educator and staff consultant for Learning 24-7, presented the first keynote address on \"The Character-Centered Teacher\". Debra Pickering, an education consultant from Denver, Colorado, presented the second keynote address on \"Characteristics of Middle Level EducationD. Throughout the Smart Step conference, educators attended breakout sessions that were grade-specific and curriculum area-specific. Pat Davenport, an education consultant from Houston, Texas, delivered two addresses. She spoke on \"A Blueprint for Raising Student Achievement\". Represe.ntatives from an three districts in Pulaski County attended. Over 1,200 Arkansas teachers and administrators attended the Smart Start Conference on July 12, 2001, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center. Smart Start is a standards-driven educational initiative which emphasizes the articulation of clear standards for student achievement and accurate measures of progress against those standards through assessments, staff development and individual school accountability. The Smart Start Initiative focused on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. The event began with opening remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. Carl Boyd, a longtime educator and staff consultant for Learning 24-7, presented the keynote address. The day featured a series of 15 breakout sessions on best classroom practices. Representatives from all three districts in Pulaski County attended. On July 18-20, 2001, the ADE held the Math/Science Leadership Conference at UCA. This provided services for Arkansas math and science teachers to support systemic reform in math/science and training for 8th grade Benchmark. There were approximately 300 teachers from across the state in attendance. 55 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) The ADE and Harcourt Educational Measurement conducted Stanford 9 test administrator training from August 1-9, 2001. The training was held at Little Rock, Jonesboro, Fort Smith, Forrest City, Springdale, Mountain Home, Prescott, and Monticello. Another session was held at the ADE on August 30, for those who were unable to attend August 1-9. The ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by video conference at the Education Service Cooperatives and at the ADE from 9:00 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on September 5, 2001. The ADE released the performance of all schools on the Primary and Middle Level Benchmark Exams on September 5, 2001. The ADE conducted Transition Core Teacher In-Service training for Central in the LRSD on September 6, 2001. The ADE conducted Transition Checklist training for Hall in the LRSD on September 7, 2001. The ADE conducted Transition Checklist training for McClellan in the LRSD on September 13, 2001. The ADE conducted Basic Co-teaching training for the LRSD on October 9, 2001. The ADE conducted training on autism spectrum disorder for the PCSSD on . October 15, 2001. Professional Development workshops (1 day in length) in scoring End of Course assessments in algebra, geometry and reading were provided for all districts in the state. Each school was invited to send three representatives (one for each of the sessions). LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD participated. Information and training materials pertaining to the Alternate Portfolio Assessment were provided to all districts in the state and were supplied as requested to LRSD, PCSSD and David 0. Dodd Elementary. On November 1-2, 2001 the ADE held the Arkansas Conference on Teaching at the Excelsior Hotel \u0026amp; Statehouse Convention Center. This presented sessions, workshops and short courses to promote exceptional teaching and learning. Educators could become involved in integrated math, science, English \u0026amp; language arts and social studies learning. The ADE received from the schools selected to participate in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a list of students who will take the test. 56 VI. REMEDIATION {Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) On December 3-7, 2001 the ADE conducted grade 6 Benchmark scoring training for reading and math. Each school district was invited to send a math and a reading specialist. The training was held at the Holiday Inn Airport in Little Rock. On December 4 and 6, 2001 the ADE conducted Mid-Year Test Administrator Training for Algebra and Geometry. This was held at the Arkansas Activities Association's conference room in North Little Rock. On January 24, 2002, the ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by ADE compressed video with Fred Jones presenting. On January 31, 2002, the ADE conducted the Smart Step quarterly meeting by NSCI satellite with Fred Jones presenting. On February 7, 2002, the ADE Smart Step co-sponsored the AR Association of Middle Level Principal's/ADE curriculum, assessment and instruction workshop with Bena Kallick presenting. On February 11-21, 2002, the ADE provided training for Test Administrators on the Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Exams. The sessions took place at Forrest City, Jonesboro, Mountain Home, Springdale, Fort Smith, Monticello, Prescott, Arkadelphia and Little Rock. A make-up training broadcast was given at 15 Educational Cooperative Video sites on February 22. During February 2002, the LRSD had two attendees for the Benchmark Exam training and one attendee for the End of Course Exam training. The NLRSD and PCSSD each had one attendee at the Benchmark Exam training and one attendee for the End of Course Exam training. The ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by compressed interactive video at the South Central Education Service Cooperative from 9:30 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on May 2, 2002. Telecast topics included creating a standards-based classroom and a seven-step implementation plan. The principal's role in the process was explained. The ADE conducted the Smart Step quarterly meeting by compressed interactive video at the South Central Education Service Cooperative from 9:30 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on May 9, 2002. Telecast topics included creating a standards-based classroom and a seven-step implementation plan. The principal's role in the process was explained. 57 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 (Continued) The Twenty-First Annual Curriculum and Instruction Conference, co-sponsored by the Arkansas Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development and the Arkansas Department of Education, will be held June 24-26, 2002, at the Arlington Hotel in Hot Springs, Arkansas. \"Ignite Your Enthusiasm for Learning\" is the theme for this year's conference, which will feature educational consultant, Dr. Debbie Silver, as well as other very knowledgeable presenters. Additionally, there will be small group sessions on Curriculum Alignment, North Central Accreditation, Section 504, Building Level Assessment, Administrator Standards, Data Disaggregation, and National Board. The Educational Accountability Unit of the ADE hosted a workshop entitled \"Strategies for Increasing Achievement on the ACT AAP Benchmark Examination\" on June 13-14, 2002 at the Agora Center in Conway. The workshop was presented for schools in which 100% of students scored below the proficient level on one or more parts of the most recent Benchmark Examination. The agenda included presentations on \"The Plan-Do-Check-Act Instructional Cycle\" by the nationally known speaker Pat Davenport. ADE personnel provided an explanation of the MPH point program. Presentations were made by Math and Literacy Specialists. Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, gave a presentation about ACTAAP. Break out sessions were held, in which school districts with high scores on the MPH point program offered strategies and insights into increasing student achievement. The NLRSD, LRSD, and PCSSD were invited to attend. The NLRSD attended the workshop. The Smart Start Summer Conference took place on July 8-9, 2002, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center and Peabody Hotel. The Smart Start Initiative focuses on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. The event included remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. After comments by the Director, Bena Kallick presented the keynote address \"Beyond Mapping: Essential Questions, Assessment, Higher Order Thinking\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. On the second day, Vivian Moore gave the keynote address \"Overcoming Obstacles: Avenues for Student Success\". Krista Underwood gave the presentation \"Put Reading First in Arkansas\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. 58 VI. REMEDIATION {Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. {Continued) 2. Actual as of March 31, 2006 {Continued) The Smart Step Summer Conference took place on July 10-11, 2002, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center and Peabody Hotel. Smart Step focuses  on improving student achievement for Grades 5-8. The event included remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. After comments by the Director, Vivian Moore presented the keynote address uovercoming Obstacles: Avenues for Student Success\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. On the second day, Bena Kallick presented MBeyond Mapping: Essential Questions, Assessment, Higher Order Thinking\". Ken Stamatis presented usmart Steps to\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_695","title":"\"Quarterly Update to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) and Joshua,'' Planning, Research, and Evaluation, 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":["2006-03-01/2006-09-01"],"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","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational planning"],"dcterms_title":["\"Quarterly Update to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) and Joshua,'' Planning, Research, and Evaluation, 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/695"],"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\nFebruary 28, 2006 RECEIVED MAR 1 - 2006 Mr. Gene Jones \u0026amp; Ms. Marjorie Powell Associate Monitors Office of Desegregation Monitoring US District Court 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Dear Mr. Jones \u0026amp; Ms. Powell: This accompanies a copy of the quarterly written update of March 1, 2006, in compliance with the June 30, 2004 memorandum opinion of the U.S. District Court. Please let us know if you would like more information. Thank you for your adviee and support in earrying out our responsibilities. Sincerely yours. Karen Director, PRE xc: Mr. Chris Heller Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 South Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 FAX 501/447-7609 February 28, 2006 John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 Dear Mr. Walker: This accompanies the quarterly written update of March 1, 2006 in compliance with the U. S. District Courts 2004 Compliance Remedy (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004, pp. 61-67). Sincerely yours, Director, PRE Department xc: Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Gene Jones Ms. Marjorie Powell Mr. Robert Pressman Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 South Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 FAX 501/447-7609 February 28, 2006 Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02421-5817 Dear Mr. Pressman: This accompanies the quarterly written update of March 1, 2006 in compliance with the U. S. District Courts 2004 Compliance Remedy (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004, pp. 61-67). Mr. Walker has asked that we furnish you with copies of reports. Sincerely yours, DeJamette, .D. Director, PRE Department xc: Mr. Chris Heller Mr. Gene Jones Ms. Marjorie Powell Mr. John Walker Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 South Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 FAX 501/447-7609 Mr. Gene Jones \u0026amp; Ms. Marjorie Powell Associate Monitors Office of Desegregation Monitoring US District Court 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 RECEIVED MAR 1 - 2006 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Dear Mr, Jones \u0026amp; Ms. Powell: On Monday, March 13 the evaluation team for Pre-K Literacy will convene at the IRC, 3001 South Pulaski Street, in room 10 at 10 AM. In a later mailing you will receive the proposed plan and questionnaires for the evaluation. We invite you to attend. Please contact us if you would like more information. Sincerely yoiKS, Karen DeJamette,rh.D. Director, PRE xc: Mr. Chris Heller Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation 3001 South Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206-2873 FAX 501/447-7609 February 28, 2006 John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 Dear Mr. Walker: On Monday, March 13 the evaluation team for Pre-K Literacy will convene at the IRC, 3001 South Pulaski Street, in room 10 at 10 AM. In a later mailing you will receive the proposed plan and questionnaires for the evaluation. We invite you to attend. Please contact us if you would like more information. Sincerely yours, Karen DeJamette, Ph.D. Director, PRE Department xc: Mr. Gene Jones, Associate Monitor Ms. Marjorie Powell, Associate Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1 Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Chris Heller LRSD Counsel Friday Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock School District (LRSD) QUARTERLY UPDATE to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) and Joshua Intervenors March 1, 2006 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF V. M H PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. ET AL., DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL., INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL., INTERVENORS Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department (PRE) Instructional Resource Center (IRC) Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206IN IN Little Rock School District (LRSD) IN IN QUARTERLY UPDATE to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) and Joshua Intervenors IN IN March 1, 2006 IN RECEIVED mar 1 - 2006 OFFICEOF desegregation monitoring IN LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF IN V. IN PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.I ETAL., DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ETAL., INTERVENORS IN KATHERINE KNIGHT, ETAL., INTERVENORS IN IN IN d Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department (PRE) Instructional Resource Center (IRC) Little Rock School District 3001 South Pulaski Little Rock, AR 72206 d dIntroduction This is the sixth quarterly written update by the Little Rock School District (LRSD) and its Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department (PRE), submitted in accordance with the U. S. District Courts 2004 Compliance Rem^y (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004, pp. 61-67). The organization of this report is that of the Compliance Remedy: II A. B. c. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. LRSD must promptly hire a highly trained team of professionals to reinvigorate PRE. The first task PRE must perform is to devise a comprehensive program assessment process which must be deeply embedded as a permanent part of LRSDs curriculum and instruction program. During each of the next two academic school years (2004-05 and 2005-06), LRSD must hire one or more outside consultants to prepare four (4) formal step 2 evaluations. PRE must (1) oversee the preparation of all eight of these step 2 evaluations\n(2) work closely with Dr. Ross and any other outside consultants . . . and (3) provide the outside consultants with any and all requested assistance and support... Evaluations will contain numbers and grade levels of teachers and administrators who contributed data, recommended program changes necessary for improved academic achievement by Afncan-American students, and brief explanations of how each change will increase a programs effectiveness. . . . PRE must notify the ODM and Joshua in writing of the names of those eight programs. In addition, after PRE and Dr. Ross have formulated a comprehensive program assessment process and reduced it to a final draft, PRE must provide a copy to the ODM and Joshua at least thirty days before it is presented to the Board for approval ... by December 31, 2004. PRE must submit quarterly written updates on the status of the . . . four step 2 program evaluations . . . during the 2004-05 school year and the four step 2 program evaluations that will be prepared during the 2005-06 school year ... to ODM and Joshua on December 1, March 1, June 1, and September 1... [ODMs responsibilities.] [Joshuas responsibilities.] Four step 2 program evaluations are due to the U. S. District Courts October 1, 2005 and four more not later than October 1, 2006. The Compliance Report is due October 15, 2006. [This Compliance Remedy supersedes earlier one.] 11 11 k II II II * i K a Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Page 2 of 5M Status as of March 1, 2006 M A. Hire a highly trained team of professionals. I IN LRSD hired a highly trained team of professionals in 2004 who met the Compliance Remedys requirements and reported this accomplishment in its first quarterly written update of December 1, 2004. This team continues to carry out diligently the Compliance Remedy, as stated in this sixth quarterly written update. IN Arthur Olds joined the PRE Department in November 2005 as testing coordinator. His resume is in Appendix A. R B. Devise and embed a comprehensive program assessment process. IN IN The PRE Department has continued to develop its comprehensive assessment process including a district portfolio, as reported in the fourth and fifth quarterly written updates. In addition to the LRSD senior administrators and principals who consult the portfolio, Dr. James Catterall used its data in his step 2 evaluation of the Districts Year-Round Education option in several schools. IN IN IN To support the portfolios expansion, frequent updates, and future utility, PRE is designing a data warehouse which LRSD staff and others can consult on a real-time basis. The LRSD Computer Information Department is consulting with Janis Group, Inc., a firm with expertise in storing, integrating, and efficiently accessing data. After determining this sophisticated data warehouses purpose(s), this team is determining which data sets to include. The data warehouse will bring the portfolio alive by supporting frequent updates of the portfolio and timely reports for purposes of developing policy, planning, research, and evaluation at levels of classrooms, schools, grades, departments, and the district. IN IN Education for the Future (EFF) devised a welcome page and questionnaires for an on-line school climate survey. EFF based the questionnaires on interests that derived from consultations on the districts mission and operations. Principals, teachers, students, and parents will participate in the survey this spring, and its results will go into the district portfolio. Appendix B shows the questionnaire drafts. IN C. Hire outside consultant(s) to prepare eight formal step 2 evaluations. If If M Step 2 evaluations of 2004-2005 During LRSDs December vacation, the Center for Research in Educational Policy (CREP), directed by Dr. Steve Ross at the University of Memphis, submitted draft evaluation reports for CompassLeaming (CL), Reading Recovery (RR), and SMART/THRIVE (S/T). Dr. Catterall sent his draft evaluation report for Year-Round Education (YRE) in early January. LRSD forwarded these four draft reports, as they arrived, to the U. S. District Court, to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, and to counsel for the Joshua Intervenors. PRE received final reports by early February and forwarded them to the same parties prior to their due dates. Summaries of the evaluation reports, submitted to the LRSD Board of Directors for their approval February 23, are in Appendices C through F. They include recommendations and resulting expectations. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Page 3 of 5LRSD evaluation policy requires follow-up of evaluation recommendations. Evaluation teams for each program will convene during the next year to consider how LRSD implements the external evaluators recommendations. To prepare for this, PRE will collect appropriate data from administrators of the four programs evaluated last year. Step 2 evaluations during the 2005-2006 school year Dr. Ross presented CREPs proposed designs for step 2 evaluations during the 2005-2006 school year21'-Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC), Pre-K Literacy (PKL), and Read 180to school principals January 18. In September, Dr. Catterall heard feedback about the evaluation design for A+ from the principal, teachers, and parents at Woodruff Elementary School. He also conducted a focus group and interviewed the principal. PRE recruited stakeholders for the four evaluation teams, and 22 participated on February 9 in reviewing their roles and discussing the four proposed evaluation designs (found in Appendices G, H, I, and J of this sixth quarterly written update). Their schedules indicate data collection starting in February. Joshua counsel did not attend\nbut ODM officers did and recommended more team members, with which PRE complied. Appendix K lists members of all four teams.  D. PRE (1) oversees the preparation of the step 2 evaluations, (2) works closely with Drs. Ross and Catterall, and (3) assists them. PRE continued working closely with the CREP team in completing their three step 2 evaluations of last year, reviewing closely and discussing with CREP its three draft reports in early January, convening the evaluation teams on January 12 for their reviews, submitting comments to CREP for incorporation into its final drafts, then submitting the final drafts to the Board of Directors for approval at its February session. PRE wrote evaluation teams questions and observations and distributed them the next day to all team members for further contributions and corrections. A week later, final comments went to CREP, and CREP sent a research brief, written in simpler language, for each program. Names of participants at the January 12 session and their comments appear in Appendix L.  On January 19, PRE convened the evaluation team for reactions to the draft report of the YRE evaluation and wrote down participants remarks, which went to all team members for additional contributions and corrections. After a week, having received no more, PRE sent the teams notes to Dr. Catterall for incorporation into his final draft. PRE submitted this final report to the Board of Directors for their approval February 23. Appendix L records participants names and their comments from January 19. I E. Evaluation will have (1) numbers and grade levels of teachers and administrators who submit data for evaluations, (2) recommended program changes necessary for improved achievement by African-American students, and (3) succinct explanations of how each change will increase its respective programs effectiveness. a During its critical reviews of the first four draft evaluation reports, PRE reminded the external evaluators of this requirement\nand the resulting final reports included these three required Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Page 4 of 5IN H elements. PRE will assure that the final four evaluation reports by external evaluators will also satisfy these requirements next year. F. Delivery of names of programs to be evaluated and the comprehensive program assessment process to ODM and Joshua. IN Earlier quarterly written updates have reported that PRE notified both ODM and Joshua of all eight LRSD programs selected for step 2 evaluations and furnished both parties with the LRSD comprehensive program assessment process per F of the U. S. District Courts June 30, 2004 remedy (page 65). In addition, PRE has notified ODM and Joshua of occasions when critical issues regarding the evaluations have been considered and decided. IN G. PRE must submit quarterly written updates on the status of step 2 evaluations. IN IN Per G of the June 30, 2004 remedy by the U. S. District Court (page 65), PRE submitted its first written quarterly update on December 1, 2004, its second on March 1, 2005, its third by June 1, 2005, the fourth prior to September 1, 2005, and the fifth written quarterly update by December 1, 2005. PRE now submits this sixth written quarterly update prior to its due date of March 1, 2005. To date, PRE has met all due dates of the remedy including the first annual report which the Court postponed from its original date of October 1, 2005. IN IN IN IN IN IN II n H N Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Page 5 of 5 A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. 1. J. K. L. APPENDICES Resume of Mr. Arthur Olds, new Testing Coordinator Draft questionnaires for on-line climate survey of LRSD teachers Summary of CompassLearning Evaluation Summary of Reading Recovery Evaluation Summary of SMART/THRIVE Summary of Year Round Education Draft design for Step 2 Evaluation of A+ by Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Draft design for Evaluation of 2L^ Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) by CREP Draft design for Evaluation of Pre-K Literacy (PKL) by CREP Draft design for Evaluation of Read 180 by CREP Evaluation team members during 2006-2007 for A+, CCLC, PKL, and Read 180 Teams and their feedback to draft evaluation reports of CL, RR, and S/T January 12 and YRE January 19, 2006 Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendices  I I 1 H IN Appendix A IN IN Testing Coordinator IN  Arthur Clyde Olds DI ID Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Department Little Rock School District ID ID ID ID ID ID Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix AEDUCATION: FOREIGN LANGUAGES: TEACHING EXPERIENCE: Arthur Clyde Olds 23 Sandstone Conway, Arkansas 72034 (501) 329-6106 arthirr.olds@conwaycorp.net A.B.D. Michigan State UruversitySpanish M.A. Michigan State Urtiversity-Spanish (1974) B.A. Brigham Young University-Spanish/History (1970) Teaching Licensure-State of Aricansas: ESL (K-12), Spanish (K-12), Latin (K-12), Middle School Spanish: Read, Speak, Write-Excellent Latin: Very Good French: Very Good 1990-present: Dunbar Magnet Middle School ESL school coordinator/ESL testing. I keep the ACSIP plan up to date and keep the several administrators and faculty current concerning school wide statistics, as I serve as School Testing Coordinator. I help with the Title 1 plan and budget and recently wrote an awarded grant of $100,000 for our after-school tutoring program in math and literacy, which I help coordinate. Teach all levels of Latin and Spanish, including our \"Introduction to Foreign Language\" courses. I have also taught reading. Serve at Dunbar as a member of the Campus Leadership Team, the Steering Corrunittee, NCA/COE chair. Discipline Hearing Committee chair. Foreign Language Department chair. Building Coordination Committee, SECME chair and team member (summer workshop). Quiz Bowl team leader and OM judge at Region and State competitions. For the LRSD serve on the Foreign Language Curriculum Revision Committee, on the District Textbook Adoption Committee in two cycles, the Middle School Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment Committee and the Activities Advisory Board. Also serve as a \"Pathwise\" Mentor for new teachers and teach computer classes for teachers in the district. 1980-present: Spanish Instructor in the Public Schools of Arkansas Taught all levels of Spanish, operated the language laboratory and served as Sparush Club advisor. Organized two torrrs to Mexico. Schools include: Southside-Bee Branch/Guy-Perkins, Perryville/East End, Magnet Cove and Parkview (Little Rock). English Instructor in the Public Schools of Arkansas Taught all levels of English (7-12), including Honors English, same schools. Co-director of a nationally recogiuzed restructuring program at Perryville High School that coordinated English, History and Cultural Studies. Worked under the direction of the State Department of Education and the Arkansas International Center at UALR. University of Central Arkansas (Instructor of Spanish1980-84) Taught all levels of Spanish, organized and conducted two summer programs in Mexico, and served as advisor to student teachers in the dq3artment. Developed third and fourth year proficiency testing and taught general education courses. Also worked in tire Elderhostel Program (Division of Continuing Education.) Taught English Composition I and II. University of Arkansas at Little Rock (Instructor of Spanish) Taught all first second and third year comses. 1969-1980: Graduate Assistant and Visiting Assistant Professor of Spanish Michigan State University (1973-80), Alma College (1976), University of Wisconsin-Madison (1972-73) and Brigham Young Uruversity (1969-72). Taught all first and second year courses offered by the departments as well as special sections of \"Spanish for Travelers.\" Had full responsibility for planning and conducting classes, text selection and production of materials for special classes. Also had language laboratory responsibilities.  II w  II R   II R R RA. C. Olds, page 2 ADMINISTRATIVE EXPERIENCE: 1990- Arkansas Foreign Language Teachers Association General Board present: and President of the Arkansas Classical Association. 1985-90: Arkansas State Coordinator for National Spanish Exam of the American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese. I 1985-88: President and Vice President, American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese DeSoto Chapter and Member, General Board of the Arkansas Foreign Language Teachers Association. K 1980-84: Department of Foreign Languages, University of Central Arkansas Student teacher advisor, proficiency testing and evaluation, textbook selection, sponsor oiLasociedad hispdnica, high school language festival judge, local university coordinator of National High School Spanish Exams, department publicity. National Committee of the Educational Testing Service CLEP Exam revision, foreign language reviewer for Publications of the Arkansas Philological Association, book reviewer for La Celestinesca. M 1974-80: Michigan State University: Department Chair Search Committee, Graduate Committee, Graduate Steering Committee, Advisory Committee, College of Arts and Letters Graduate Committee. H 1971-72: Brigham Young University: Department representative to College of Humanities Graduate Committee and Graduate School Advisory Committee. n RELATED WORK EXPERIENCE: 2001: Six week technology workshop, University of Arkansas at Little Rock IN 1997: SECME Summer Workshop, Tuskegee Institute 1991: II Summer workshop, Kingston, Jamaica, sponsored by the Arkansas International Center at UALR 1988: II Summer workshop, Guadalajara, Mexico, sponsored by the Arkansas International Center at UALR n 1985: Oral Proficiency Workshop of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, held at UALR 1984: First cycle of Program for Effective Teaching II 1974- Contract translation (Spanish to English/English to Spanish) for local present: businesses and legal translation for lawyers and the court II 1983-84: Editorial Board, Publications of the Arkansas Philological Association 1973-79: Editor, Tropos II11 A. C. Olds, page 3 II PUBLICATIONS/LECTURES: Papers presented at the Arkansas Philological Association Meetings\n\"Calisto: el loco enamorado (La Celestina).\" (1997) \"Celestina: Character as Author (La Celestina).\" (1995) \"Parmeno and Sempronio (La Celestina) and the Process of Self-Creation.\" (1993) \"The Thrust and Parry of Rojas' Prose: The Ironic Vision of La Celestina.\" (1991) \"Mirrors of Ambiguity: The Author in Search of Self in Miguel de Unamuno's La novela de Don Sandalio, jugador de ajedrez.\" (1989) \"If I'm OK and You're OK, Why Can't We Communicate?\" More on the continuing Saga of Don Quijote and Sancho.\" (1988) \"Irony and La Celestina\nThe Wonders of Rojas'Prose.\" (1987) \"Penas arriba : Adventure ofthe Archetypal Hero.\" (1986) M B B Other papers / lectures: \"Coordination and Cooperation: The High School and the University in Global Studies.\" Ark. International Studies Conference (UALR, April 1989.) \"Don Quijote y Sancho: El problema de la comunicacion.\" Tropos, 8 (1980), 17-27. \"Structure and Narrative Technique in La Celestina: The Aside.\" Mid-West MLA (Indianapolis: November, 1979). \"Scholarly Publishing: Dialogue Between an Editor and a Graduate Student.\" American Association of Comparative Literature Meetings (State College, Pennsylvania: April, 1979). Lockert, Lucia Fox. Spanish and Spanish-American Women Novelists. Scarecrow Press, 1979. (Book-length translation) \"Testing and Foreign Language Teaching\" (1977) and \"Oral Practice in Context\" (1976). Presented as part of a series on Foreign Language Teaching organized at Michigan State University. B 11 B PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: Arkansas Foreign Language Teachers Association, Modem Language Association, Mid-West MLA, American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese, Societe Rencesvals, Sigma Delta Pi, Comediantes, Arkansas Philological Association, Arkansas Classical Association, Mid-America Medieval Association, American Classical League, Classical Association of the Middle West and South B PROFESSIONAL TRAVEL\n1997: SECME workshop, Tuskegee Institute. 1991: Summer workshop, Kingston, Jamaica. 1988: Summer workshop, Guadalajara, Mexico. 1981, 1982, 1986, 1987: Guided study programs in Mexico. 1969-70 and 1970-71: Semester Abroad programs in Spain with BYU. 1970 and 1971: Extensive Summer European travel. 1966-1968: Close daily contact with Spanish-speaking people of Colorado, Texas and New Mexico. B B B REFERENCES: Available on request. B BAppendix B 4 I H n II n n n n n On-line Climate Survey Draft Questionnaires for Administrators (Principals), Staff (Teachers and others), Students, and Parents Prepared by Education for the Future For Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Department Little Rock School District Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix B cII Education for the Future i I II Strongly Dim^ Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree w  I am a valued member of this School District I am able to participate meaningfully in District decisions that impact my responsibilities 1 am able to work with District leadership to generate special resources when I need them I am allowed to be an effective leader in my school I am encouraged to find unique solutions to issues in my school I clearly understand the specifics of what I am held accountable for in perfonnance reviews I enjoy my job 0.                              I understand what is expected of me in my role Others in the District have the same understanding of the nature of my role that I have People in the District can explain the Districts vision People in the District respect me      S)   11          Principals in the District generally like what they do here The District leadership cares about me The District leadership trusts my judgment The District provides an organizational climate in which all schools can succeed                  CD The District strategic plan will lead us to make our vision a reality There are opportunities forme to develop my skills There is a District-level strategic plan in place As a rule, District leadership requires that I use specific strategies to accomplish District goals in my school District leadership provides adequate resources for me to get my job done effectively District leadership provides me with direction District leadership supports my decisions II II II                                  Everyone who works in this District is expected to deliver high quality work Good work is consistently recognized in this District           II Copyright  1991 -2005 Education for die Future Initiative, Chico. CA. Page 1 of 2 II II II H Education for the Future I Wliat are the most effective things that the District does to facilitate your effectiveness? 4 What are the least effective things that the District does in relation to your effectiveness? What should the District be doing, that it is not doing currently, to help make you more effective? Hn fl fl - - - - - - - - - - - - Administrator Demographic Data- - - - - - - - - - - - - Demoi^raphic data, which is used for suniniary analysis, will not he reported if individualscan be identified. fl fl Ethnicity: (fi// in all that apply) Q African-American O American Indian/Alaskan Native O Asian O Caucasian 0 Hispanic/Latino O Other_______________ Gender\nO Female O Male 1 am a(ii): O Elementary Assistant Principal O Elementary Principal O Middle School Assistant Principal O Middle School Principal O High School Assistant Principal O High School Principal O Other School Administrator O DistrictAdministrator O specify:_________________ n n I have been in iny current position: I have been an administrator for: O 1st Year O 2-3 Years O 4-6Ycars O 7-t()Yc\nirs O ll-14Years O 15-20Years O 21-25 Years O 26+Yeiirs O pt Year O 2-3Years O 4-6 Years O7-10Years O ll-14Years O 15-20Years O 21-25 Years O 26-30Years O 31-35 Years O 36-4()Years O 41 +Years Copyright 1991-2005 Education for the Future Initiativc.Chico.CA. Pagc2()f2 Education for the Future This PDF file is for content review purposes onlynot intended for use in questionnaire administration. For more information about administering and analyzing Education for the Future questionnaires, please visit http:ileff.esuchico.edul(iueslionnaire_resourcesl. [ Strongly Agree Neutral Agree I feel: I Strongly Disagree Disagree Demographic daia, which is used for summary analysis, will not be reported if individuals can be identified. Ethnicity: (fiil in all that apply) O African-American O American Indian O Asian O Caucasian O Latino/IIispanic O Other like I belong at this school that the staff cares about me that learning can be fun that learning is fun at this school recognized for good work intrinsically rewarded for doing my job well clear about what ray job is at this school tliat others are clear about what my job is at this school I work with people who:                                   11 I am a(n): O classroom teacher O instructional assistant O certificated staff (other than aclasKTOcyni tcacitcr) O classified staff (other than an inairucttonal xssistant) treat me with respect listen if I have ideas about doing things better My administrators:     CD     Iremsfor teachers only: I teach: O pre-kindergarten O primary grades O upper elementary grades O middle school grades O high school grades 9-10 O high school grades 11-12 I have been teaching: O 1-3 years 04-6 years 07-lOyears O 11 or more years treat me with respect are effective instructional leaders facilitate communication effectively support me in my work with students support shared decision making allow me to be an effective instructional leader are effective in helping us reach our vision I have the opportunity to: develop my skills think for myself, not just carry out instructions I believe student achievement can increase through: differentiating instruction effective professional development related to our vision integrating instruction across the curriculum teaching to the state standards the use of computers the use of varied technologies providing a threat-free environment close personal relationships between students and teachers addressing student learning styles effective parent involvement using ongoing smdent assessments related to state standards student self-assessments teacher use of student achievement data /love: working at this school seeing the results of iny work with students Education for ihr Future Initiative (2tX\u0026gt;6) Chico, C A: Education For the Future                                       Continued                                                                     * K BIB i Education for the Future I j Strongly Agree 1 1 Neutral Agree 1 believe: j Strongly Disagree Disagree II M every student can leam the instructional program at this school is challenging this school provides an atmosphere where every student can succeed quality work is expected of all students at this school quality work is expected of me quality work is expected of all the adults working at this school the vision for this school is clear the vision for this school is shared we have an action plan in place which can get us to our vision this school has a good public image it is important to communicate often with parents 1 communicate with parents often about their childs progress 1 communicate with parents often about class activities the school buildings and grounds are clean I work effectively with: n II special education students English learners ethnically/racially diverse students students who live in poverty low-achieving students Morale is high on the part of: II n teachers students support staff administrators A A Items for teachers and instructional assistants only: Student outcomes for my class(es) are clear to me Student outcomes for my class(es) are clear to my students Teachers in this school communicate with each other to make student learning consistent across grades I know the state standards I teach to the state standards Learning is fun in my classroom 1 love to teach A A e Education for ihc Future Iniiiative(2006) tliico, C!A\nEducation for the Future fl                 CD             @  @                   Continued                                                                            (S\u0026gt;    \u0026gt; n Education for the Future i   What are the strengths of this school?  B B B What needs to be improved? B B B B B B B B  Education forthe Future Initiativc\u0026lt;2(\u0026gt;06) Chico.CA: Education for ibc Futurc BM Education for the Future H StudentsI Strongly Agree MH I am in: 03' Grade 04' Grade 05' Grade 06' Grade 07' Grade I am: 08*^ Grade 09'Grade O IChGrade O 11* Grade O 12' Grade I Neutral Agree I Strongly Disagree Disagree II H II AAA AAA A A O African-American O American Indiiin/ Alaskan Native O Asian O Caucasian O Hispanic/Lalino O Other I am: O Boy OGirl I am: O participating in extracurricular activities O involvedinacommunity service project O enrolletl in a service learning class When I am at school, I feel: I belong I am safe I have fun teaming I like this school This school is good 1 have freedom at school I have choices in the way 1 learn My teacher(s) treat me with respect My teacher(s) care about me My teacher(s) think I will be successful My teacher(s) listen to my ideas My principal cares about me My teacher(s) is a good teacher My teacher(s) believe I can leant I am recognized for good work I ani challenged by the work my teacher(s) a,sk me to do The work I do in class makes me think I know what I am supposed to be learning in my classes I am a good student 1 can be a better student Working hard will make me do well in school Very good work is expected at my school 1 behave well at school Students arc treated fairly by teachers Students are treated fairly by the principal Students are treated fairly by school resource officers (SRO) Students at my school treat me with respect I am safe from bullies Students at my school are friendly 1 have lots of friends I have support for learning at home My family believes\nI can do well in school My family wants me to do well in school My school building and grounds are clean Copyright  2006 EducaGon for the Future Initiative. Chico. CA.                                A                                                                                   5.                          Page 1 of2 Education for the Future Students I What do you like about this school? What do you wish was different at this school? Copyright  2006 Education f\u0026lt;r the Future Initiative, Chico, CA, Page2of2    II      M  Education for the Future H This PDF file is for eowteiit review purposes onlynot Intended for use in questionnaire administration.. For more information about administering and analyzing Education for the Future questionnaires* please visit htlp:/!cffx!iuchico.edulqiiestumnaire,_re3oiirccsi. Disagree = Strongly Disagree I feel welcome at my childs school j Stron^yAg^ Neutral Agree  H 14 14 14 14 14 14 I am informed about my childs progress I know what my childs teacher(s) expect of my child My child is safe at school My child is safe going to and from school There is adequate supervision during school There is adequate supervision before and after school Teachers show respect for the students Students show respect for other students The school meets the social needs of the students The school meets the academic needs of the students The school expects quality work of its students The school has an excellent learning environment I know how well my child is progressing in school I like the schools report cards/progress report I respect the schools teachers I respect the schools principal Overall, the school performs well academically The school succeeds at preparing children for future work The school has a good public image The schools assessment practices are fair My childs teacher(s) help me to help my child learn at home 1 support my childs learning at home I feel good about myself as a parent I feel educational opportunitie.s at my child's school are provided equitably The school buildings and grounds are clean I feel 1 am a valued parmcr in my childs education 1 have access to school materials and resources that support my childs education    CO                 14 14 14 fl Childrens grades: O Kindergancn O First Grade O Second Grade O Third Grade O Fourth Grade O Fifth Grade O Sixth Grade O Seventh Grade O Eighth Grade O Ninth Grade O Tenth Grade O Eleventh Grade O Twelfth Grade Number of children in this school: CD My native language is: O Chinese O Eastern European O English O Japanese O Koretm O Spanish O Vietnamese O Other______________ Copyright  2006 Education for die Future Initiative, Chico.CA.                                                            @                   Number of children in the household:  Ethnic background: (fill in all that apply) o Black O American Indian/Alaskan Native O Asian O White O Hispanic/Latino O Other_______________ Responding: O Mother O Father O Guardian O Other                  @ @   Page 1 oQ Education for the Future i M M What are the strengths of this school?  H What needs to be improved? K  Copyright  2006 Education for the Future Initiative, Chico, CA. Pagc2of2 H Appendix C n H H H fl CompassLeaming (CL) Evaluation by Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis Summary and Evaluation Team Prepared by Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Department Little Rock School District Quarterly Written Update March 1, 20006 Appendix C Summary: CompassLearning Evaluation Evaluation conducted by Dr. Steven Ross (CREP) Reported by PRE Department  B Summary of CompassLearning (CL) Implementation in LRSD: CL is a computer-based program for improving learning in language arts, reading, and math with personalized lessons tailored to each students needs. CL also helps teachers manage their students learning and gives administrators on-going perfonnance reports. LRSD introduced CL (initially called Jostens) ten years ago but left election to use CL to each school. During 2004-2005, 19 elementary schools used CL in grades K-5. Lab attendants and/or technology specialists assist teachers with integrating lessons into their curriculums. Students work on language arts, reading, and/or math for 30 to 60 minutes per week in computer labs with a lab attendant and classroom teacher present. Some also had CL activities in their regular classrooms.  B B Plan and Participants: The evaluation plan for CL included: (1) analyses of CL student achievement and program data, and (2) surveys and interviews with principals, CL specialists, teachers, and parents. At school faculty meetings, 356 elementary teachers returned questionnaires in which they indicated their familiarity with CL and their opinions of it\n318 indicated at least some experience with CL. At the next page are evaluation team members. Bl B B Results:  Evaluators found mixed, small CL effects in African American achievement scores.  While LRSD provided fully adequate computer equipment and personnel, teachers used CL student reports little and exposed their students to less CL than prescribed.  Teachers, lab attendants, and technology specialists regarded CL program implementation, impacts, and strengths very highly  Parents/guardians of CL students supported CL, too, but did not fully understand it.  Principals who stopped CL still supported it. Recommended Program Modifications: \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; Ensure students spend the recommended effort60 minutes each for language arts, reading, and math each week for grades K - 5, or 90 minutes in grades 3 - 5. Teachers should understand CL reports most critical for adapting lessons to needs of African American students and use the CL reports to assist lab attendants. Principals must use monthly CL class-level and school-level reports to monitor and adjust instructional interventions for African American students. Improve district coordination to ensure language and math activities align with the LRSD curriculum and follow recommended CL guidelines. B Expectations of Program Modifications \u0026lt; Progressive gains on standardized test scores over time 4 Closer adherence to CL guidelines 4 More proficiently using student perfonnance data to meet the individuals needs B B B Quarterly Written Update March 1, 20006 Appendix C4. More effective instructional leaders of schools through deeper understanding of CL 4 resources and teacher skills to address student learning deficiencies Frequent monitoring and more timely supportive interventions Evaluation Team Members for CompassLeaming H Team Leader - Dr. Karen DeJamette, PRE Department CL program specialist - Mr. Travis Taylor, Instractional Technology Department Statistician - Jim Wohlleb, PRE Department Programmer - Mr. Ken Savage, Computer Information Services Department Technical writer - Dr. Deborah Lowther, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External consultants - Dr. Deborah Lowther, Dr. Dan Strahl, Mr. Aaron McDonald, and Dr. Steve Ross, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External reviewer - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies PRE Reviewers - Ms. Maurecia Malcolm Robinson, and Dr. Ed Williams, PRE Department Parent - Ms. Amy Thompson Teachers - Ms. Amy Thompson and Ms. Thelma Watson, Fulbright Elementary School Principal - Ms. Deborah Mitchell, Fulbright Elementary School M IN IN IN IN IN IN Quarterly Written Update March 1, 20006 Appendix C Appendix D Reading Recovery (RR) Evaluation by Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis Summary and Evaluation Team      M H   Prepared by Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Department Little Rock School District a K   H Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix D riSummary: Reading Recovery Evaluation Evaluation conducted by Dr. Steven Ross, University of Memphis Summary by PRE Department Summary of Reading Recovery (RR) Implementation in LRSD: RR teachers tutor students one-on-one for 30 minutes every school day for 12 to 20 weeks. Successful completion (called discontinued) equips students to learn at grade level and lessens the need for special attention. RR teachers designate students not up to grade in less than 20 weeks as Incomplete and those not up to grade by 20 weeks as recommended for further action. LRSD has expanded RR and partnered with the UALR College of Education to train teachers and advance their skills. In the 2004-2005 school year, 28 trained RR teachers served 18 of the districts 34 elementary schools. Plan and Participants: The evaluation plan for Reading Recovery included: (1) analyses of RR student achievement and program data, (2) principal, teacher, and parent surveys and interviews, and (3) observations of RR tutoring sessions. H Evaluators observed 16 RR teachers and collected questionnaires from 22 and another 156 nonRR teachers in classrooms. They also interviewed 10 principals and 4 teachers in training. Evaluation team members are found on the next page. H Results: n 91 9i in iR H 9{ RR improved African-American students reading skills. There are opportunities for further improvements in RR. RR experts observed well trained teachers who applied the RR model with high fidelity. RR teachers regard RR program highly for aiding African American students. RR impressed non-RR, classroom teachers, too, as beneficial to African American students. Principals agreed that their African American students are bridging the achievement gap through RR. Parents/guardians of RR students perceived RR as benefiting their children. H [fl Recommended Program Modifications:  An expanded program with more RR teachers should monitor students more often after they discontinue RR to ensure sustaining their momentum. More LRSD students need RR than RR teachers can tutor. RR teachers might feel pressure to discontinue one group of students in order to begin another group. If true, the necessary follow-up contact can not occur\nand therefore the fl slippage in achievement that has been seen in other districts might occur in H LRSD, too. In an expanded RR program, RR teachers can more closely monitor their discontinued students and maintain their gains. In addition to expanding RR, LRSD should explore a transitional plan for students who discontinue. Such a plan could involve daily monitored reading that would also buffer against slippage. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix D fl Increased professional development of classroom (non-RR) teachers would better enable them to integrate their RR students back into the classroom once discontinued and to give them appropriate instruction and feedback so that they keep on improving. Increase LRSDs partnership with UALR to help develop the transitional plan and the professional development for classroom (non-RR) teachers. Future studies might analyze more in-depth a small number of students who kept on gaining after discontinuing RR. Many principals and RR teachers cited examples of profound student achievement and sustained, noteworthy success of former African-American RR students. Such studies could determine what factors led to successes and how teachers can better help other students.   H Expectations of Program Modifications: Reading Recovery has valuable components that, with changes, can be even more effective. With program modifications, the Little Rock School District could expect:  Progressive gains on standardized test scores over time.  Increased number of students involved in the Reading Recovery program.  Closer adherence to Reading Recovery guidelines, particularly the number of sessions required for optimum benefits.  More teachers throughout the district better able to serve at-risk students.  Sustained achievement of students upon completion of the Reading Recovery program.  A stronger relationship with experts at UALR that would continue to provide the Little Rock School District with the most up-to-date research findings and best practices for reading and literacy instruction.     Evaluation Team Members for Reading Recovery  Team Leader - Jim Wohlleb, PRE Department Reading Recovery program specialist - Ms. Pat Busbea, Early Childhood / Elementary Literacy Department, and Dr. Linda Dorn, UALR College of Education Statistician - Dr. Ed Williams, PRE Department Programmer - Mr. Ken Savage, Computer Information Services Department Technical writer - University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External consultant - Dr. Anna Grehan, Mr. Aaron McDonald, and Dr. Steve Ross, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External reviewer - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies PRE reviewer - Ms. Maurecia Malcolm Robinson, PRE Department Parent - Ms. Michelle Bonds-Hall Teacher - Ms. Michelle Dorsey, Chicot Elementary School        Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix Dfl fl fl fl fl N fl fl fl Appendix E SMART/THRIVE (S/T) Evaluation by Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis Summary and Evaluation Team n Prepared by Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Department Little Rock School District M M Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix E fl  Summary: SMART/THRIVE Evaluation Evaluation conducted by Dr. Steven Ross, University of Memphis Reported by PRE Department  Summary of SMART/THRIVE (S/T) Implementation in LRSD: SMART and THRIVE, designed by two veteran LRSD teachers, serve at-risk students. In 1999, LRSD implemented and funded them in part by the Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement Program and NSF. w I S/T purposes are to prepare students entering Algebra I (8 to 9* grade) through supplemental lessons (SMART), prepare students to meet state standards in Algebra I (THRIVE), and instill confidence. SMART meets for two consecutive weeks in the summer. THRIVE meets every other Saturday in spring semester. SMART uses a co-teaching model with one teacher and one high school student mentor, while THRIVE uses a co-teaching model with two certified teachers. II Plan and Participants: The evaluation plan for S/T included: (1) analyses of S/T student achievement and program data\n(2) surveys, focus groups, and interviews with principals, S/T specialists, teachers, students, and parents\nand (3) observations of classes and teachers. I I Evaluators observed five O^-grade classes and collected questionnaires from S/T teachers (IOS and 18 T) and Algebra I teachers (25 S and 33 T). Evaluation team members are listed on page 2. Results: o o o O O n Eighth and ninth grade African American students in either S, T, or both more likely scored as proficient or advanced. Substantial gains on Algebra I End of Course exam, strongest among students in both S and T. African American students in both comparison and S/T groups performed the same as others on the ITBS. Students, their parent and instructors, and principals expressed satisfaction with S/T. Students and teachers noted increased self-confidence. Recommended Program Modifications: \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt; \u0026gt;  1  Expand scope of S/T to more students. Increase frequency of classes for S/T. Train more teachers for S/T. Follow S/T students through graduation and beyond to learn long-term outcomes. Provide transportation to students.    Expectations of Program Modifications A A raising student achievement among African American students provide the district with a model that can be easily replicated, gain information about factors that set S/T apart from classroom Algebra and preAlgebra classes sustained remediation of African American students   Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix EEvaluation Team Members for SMART/THRIVE n Team leader - Ms. Maurecia Malcolm Robinson, PRE Department Smart / Thrive program specialist - Ms. Vanessa Cleaver and Ms. Marcelline Carr Statistician - Dr. Ed Williams, PRE Department Programmer - Mr. Ken Savage, Computer Information Services Department Technical writer - University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy External evaluators - Dr. Lyle Davis, Mr. Aaron McDonald, and Dr. Steve Ross, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy, and Gail Weems, UALR College of Education External reviewer - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education \u0026amp; Information Studies PRE reviewer - Jim Wohlleb, PRE Department Parent - Ms. Rose Cook Teacher - Ms. Tonjuna Iverson, Parkview Magnet High School N H H H M H M Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix E Appendix F    Year Round Education (YRE) Evaluation  by  James Catterall, Ph.D. University of California at Los Angeles    Summary and Evaluation Team   Prepared by Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation Department Little Rock School District      n Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix FN M Summary: Year Round Education Evaluation Conducted by Dr. James Catterall Reported by PRE Department Summary of Year Round Education (YRE) Implementation in LRSD: The YRE design is a single track 45-10 calendar in which all students and teachers in the school are in class or on vacation at the same time. The 45-10 refers to 45 days enrolled during a quarter then 10 days of Intersession/vacation. Formal Intersession programs operate for five days within an Intersession break, and student attendance is voluntary. Mabelvale, Stephens, and Woodruff Elementary Schools have operated on a YRE calendar since school year 2000-2001, while Cloverdale and Mitchell Elementary Schools began YRE in 2002-2003. fl Evaluation Plan and Participants: The evaluation plan for YRE included: analyses of YRE student achievement and program data, and surveys and interviews with administrators and principals, special education teachers, classroom teachers, and parents from each school. The following list shows the number of teachers included from each grade level\nPre-K, 10\nK, 9\n1 8\n2\"*, 9\n3\"*, 8\n4', 7\n5\"', 7\nself-contained, 3\nprincipal, 1\nand LRSD office, 3. fl fl Results: Conclusion III.l. YRE schools outperformed the comparison schools with respect to percentages of students proficient in literacy and mathematics over a five-year span leading up to spring 2005, an advantage measured in percentage changes in scores over the base year as well as in absolute percentage proficient point gains. fl fl Conclusion III.2. Based on analyses of test score residuals, YRE schools outperformed other schools very modestly in literacy and significantly in math on the 2005 Grade 4 Benchmarks. This means that YRE schools generally performed higher than would be expected from both past performance and student demographics. It also means that comparison schools generally fell short of predicted scores, particularly in mathematics. fl fl Conclusion IV. 1. YRE schools showed significantly more progress between 2000 and 2005 than did comparison schools in five important indicatorsstudent mobility, disciplinary referrals, short-term suspensions, and African American student proficiency in both math and literacy. Attendance rates showed no meaningful change for either school group. The magnitude of these changes for YRE schools and their consistent outpacing of changes in comparison schools are significant indications of positive developments in YRE schools. fl fl Conclusion V.l. Two different analyses point to small performance advantages for students who attend YRE-school Intersessions in comparison to students who do not\nDirect comparisons of the percentages of students proficient on the 2005 Benchmark tests and correlations between Intersession attendance and academic indicators come to the same conclusion. Either in one way or in some combined way, the observed differences may reflect just which students chose to attend Intersessions and which students did not. Under either circumstance, a sound argument for attending Intersessions can be made. fl Conclusion VI. 1. Parent, student, and teacher surveys accumulated over three years provide an overall appraisal of achievement conditions in YRE- versus regular-calendar schools. With respect to academic advantages or conditions that might contribute to academic advantages, about 60-65 percent of parents and students reported higher achievement in YRE schools. Teachers Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix F fl reported better conditions for learning, but feweronly about 35 percentreported actual academic achievement differences favoring YRE schools when asked this question directly. Recommended Program Modifications:  Institute academic-enrichment and student-tutoring sessions during Intersessions, which are mainly recreational, or craft-, special interest-, or hobby-focused. Intersessions could be occasions of voluntary or urged academic assistance.  Increase the numbers of students who participate in Intersessions. Since they particularly and YRE education generally showed positive impacts on student achievement, it makes sense to help the Intersession program reach more students. About 36 percent of all students in grades 3, 4, and 5 across YRE schools had never attended an Intersession as of spring 2005. Potentially effective steps to boost participation are communications between teachers and parents (although we did not find inadequacies in this area), family assistance that might foster attendance (such as child care for very young siblings), and added incentives for teachers to create and offer attractive opportunities. H Ml Ml Ml Ml Bl Bl  Boost African American student participation in Intersessions. Participation rates among the few white and other non-African American students are extremely high. Attempts to recruit students for Intersessions will largely be greeted by African American audiences. Bl  Retain the YRE structure of four evenly spaced terms punctuated by the two-week Intersession and vacation periods. Bl Bl Expectations of Program Modifications:  The modification of Intersessions to include academic opportunities would increase instructional time and effectively shorten breaks between academic terms. This would add academic continuity. A direct expectation would be higher academic achievement levels. An indirect benefit would be improving teacher-student relationships through exposing more teachers and students to each other and additional experiences of teachers with the same students. n   Increasing participation in Intersessions would extend academic benefits to greater portion of YRE-school students and permit additional Intersession course offerings. Both of these changes would lead to higher achievement. Similar to the indirect benefit above, expanded Intersession program would greater exposure would improve teacher-student relationships. M M  Boosting Intersession enrollments of African American students would increase their academic success.  B  Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix FEvaluation Team Members for Year Round Education 4 4 Team Leader - Dr. Ed Williams, PRE Department YRE program specialists - Ms. Janice Wilson, Principal of Woodruff Elementary School, and Ms. Sophia Parchman, Assistant Principal of Mann Arts and Science Middle School Statistician - Ms. Maurecia Malcolm Robinson, PRE Department Programmer - Mr. Ken Savage, LRSD Computer Information Services Department Technical writer - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies External evaluators - Dr. James Catterall, UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies External reviewer - Dr. Steve Ross, University of Memphis Center for Research in Educational Policy, and Gail Weems, UALR College of Education PRE reviewer - Jim Wohlleb, PRE Department Parent - Ms. Diana Layne-Jordan, parent and PT A president, Stephens Elementary School Teacher - Ms. Judy Harbour, fifth grade teacher at Stephens Elementary School N fl fl fl fl fl fl Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix F Appendix G Proposed Plan for Evaluation of the A+ Program at Woodruff Elementary School James Catterall, Ph.D. University of California at Los Angeles   II  II            Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix GProposal for the Evaluation of the A+ Program at Woodruff Elementary School 4 Evaluation Questions Primary Evaluation Question'. 4 1. Has the A+ program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Proposed Design Examination of achievement test scores between 2001 and 2005for Woodruff School and for comparison schools developed for the 2005 YRE program evaluation. (Scores will include 2006 if scale scores are made available for all applicable grades 60 days in advance of the due date of the draft report.) Descriptive year-to-year test score changes will be described. A predictive model for 2006 Benchmark test scale scores will be undertaken if data are available. H H Examining performance indicators from the Portfolio of Data for the Little Rock School District for differences between African American and white students (2005 edition or 2006 edition if available). These data include Benchmark proficiency scores, attendance, student mobility, and student behavioral indicators. Supplemental (Qualitative/Level 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What are the quality, nature, and level of implementation of A+ at Woodruff Elementary School in 2005-06? Proposed Design Surveys and interviews with all Woodruff teachers will assess the scope and history of teacher and staff participation in A+. Expert observation of one demonstration A + lesson of each teacher followed by expert debriefing of teachers regarding purposes and methods, and teachers appraisal of outcomes. H Assessment of the impact of A+ on the Woodruff School Culture (norms, assumptions about students and teaching and learning) based on intervie'ws, surveys, and follow-ups. H M Collection of sample student group or individual art products with brief written student comment about the objects connections to their learning. Students to decide. About 2 per classroom. Public display in school hall(s). Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix G H n 2. What is the level of participation in A+ by African American students relative to other ethnic groups? Proposed Design Assessing student participation by classroom for 2005-06 and 2004-05 using archival records and current student rosters. What are the perceptions of teachers and Art Specialists regarding A+ program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Proposed Design Assessed by surveys, interviews and observations of teachers and art specialists. 3. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of A+ regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Proposed Design It Assessed through a universal parent survey and by randomly selected telephone interviews of about 25 parents throughout the school, stratified K-2 versus grade 3-5. Basic school statistics 2005-06 Woodruff has 219 students in grades K-5  17 Caucasian, 2 other, and 238 African American (92% A-A) It It Summary of Instruments and Participants by Evaluation Question It Evaluation Question Primary Question: 1. What are the effects of participation in A+ on the achievement of African American and other students? Participants Students at Woodruff and comparison school(s Data Sources It  ITBS Grades K-5  Arkansas Benchmarks for 3-5) It It Supplemental Questions: 1. What are the quality, nature, and level of implementation of A+ at Woodruff in 2005-06? All students  All teachers  Art Specialists  District Arts Coordinator  Grade 3-5 student surveys  Parents Student surveys  Teacher Survey (faculty meeting)  Art Specialist Phone Interview  District Art Coordinator Phone Interview  Classroom Observations It M M H Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix G4 4 4 4 4 4 2. What is the level of participation in A+ by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school?_____________________ 3. What are the perceptions of teachers and Art Specialists regarding A+ implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of A+ students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  All students  Comparison schools  All African American vs. all Caucasian  All teachers  Art Specialists Parents School records/archival data ITBS and Benchmark scores.  Teacher Survey  Art Specialist Interview  Parent Survey  In-depth parent interviews 4 Timelines September, 2005 Initial meeting with principal and lead teachers 4 January, 2006: 4 February: 4 March-April: May-June: July-August: 4 4 September 1: October 1: Planning/refinement, consultation with PRE and instrument development Review of proposed evaluation by team and any changes Begin observations. District Arts Coordinator Interview (phone)\nselect Art Specialist and Observation School Samples\nbegin Art Specialist Interviews (phone) Teacher Survey (at faculty meetings), complete Art Specialist Interviews\ncomplete observations\ncomplete Student Focus Groups. Records/Archival data analyses Achievement data analyses/complete survey and interview analyses, review of draft report by PRE and evaluation teams, feedback from PRE, and preparation of final report Submit final report to PRE. LRSD submits final report to U.S. District Court. 4 Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix GAppendix H Proposed Plan for Evaluation of 21 Century Community Learning Centers Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis p H W P P P P P P n R n n p  p p Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix HProposal for Evaluation of 21 Century Community Learning Centers in the Little Rock School District (LRSD)^ Evaluation Questions Primary Evaluation Question: 1. Have the 2L Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. What is the nature and level of implementation of the CCLC programs? 2. What is the level of participation in CCLCs by African American students? 3. What are the perceptions of teachers and school administrators regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians and students of program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? School and Program Descriptions fl fl Several schools in the LRSD have hosted CCLCs, which offer academic support\nmath/science activities\nmusic/arts/drama\nentrepreneurial programs\ndrug/violence prevention, counseling, and character education\ntutoring/mentoring\nparent involvement\ntechnology and communication\nfamily literacy/education\nrecreational programs\nextended library hours\nand services for truant, suspended or expelled students. Individual centers provide a subset of the possible activities. A summary of CCLC programs, based on their respective grant applications, is provided below\nfl fl Woodruff Elementary School (WES) is one of 30 elementary schools in the district. The WES program includes visual and performing arts enrichment, family services, educational technology, cultural activities, and educational and recreational field trips. Program sessions are both before- and after-school, on Saturdays, and during intersessions. Parent/family services are also provided. fl fl Henderson Health Sciences Middle Magnet School (HHSMMS) is one of eight middle schools in the district. The HHSMMS program was developed as a comprehensive out-of-school program which includes before- and after-school elements, a summer program, and a Saturday program. An after-school Tutoring Club is designed to assist students academically. Morning sessions are organized to provide homework help and extended access to the library and technology resources. Enrichment opportunities are coordinated with community partners. A summer camp focuses on mathematics, literacy, and science, with technology as a strong component. H M Mabelvale Magnet Middle School (MMMS) is another of eight middle schools in the LRSD. The CCLC at MMMS is intended to provide remediation and enrichment in the areas of mathematics and literacy, as well as social and emotional development for students. This Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H fl  program extends the schools magnet thematic programs and also builds on a previous Safe Schools/Healthy Schools grant. The program includes an after-school Tutoring Club, a Homework Club, and an Enrichment Club which provide extended learning opportunities relating to MMMSs magnet areas of Environmental Science, Medical Studies, and Technology. ri ri Southwest Middle School (SMS) is the third LRSD middle school that provides a CCLC. The grant application from this site was not available for review, but CREP presumes that its program is similar to that of the other two middle schools in the district which host a CCLC. The design ofthe program will be determined during the initial implementation of the evaluation. ri ri McClellan High School (McCHS) is one of five high schools in the district. Its program includes a drug and violence prevention program and a youth development component emphasizing counseling, service learning, mentoring and employment opportunities. Program sessions are scheduled both before- and after-school and on Saturdays. The program also operates in the summer, with a six-week Algebra 1 program and a two-week 9*** grade transition program. Parent/family sessions are also provided. ri ri Hall High School (HHS) is another of the five high schools in the district. The HHS program includes a drug and violence prevention program and a youth development component emphasizing counseling, service learning, mentoring, and employment opportunities. Program sessions are scheduled both before- and after-school and on Saturdays. The program also operates in the summer with a six-week Algebra 1 program and a two-week 9*** grade transition program. Parent/family sessions are also provided. ri ri Proposed Design ri A mixed methods design will be used to gather information about the various CCLCs in the LRSD. In addition, a case study design will be used gather information about MMMSs CCLC. The goal of the mixed methods design is to obtain broad information regarding a variety of programs with respect to stakeholder perceptions of implementation and impact. The goal of the case study design is to obtain in-depth information to assist in understanding and judging a program in the context in which it operates. The detailed program description can then lead to naturalistic generalization of the program to other contexts (Worthen, Sanders, \u0026amp; Fitzpatrick, 1997). Both quantitative and qualitative data sources will be employed to address the research questions as follows: 3 n n Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H n K H ri riH  I Primary Evaluation Question: 1. Have the Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students?  For the achievement analysis, the preliminary plan is to employ a quasi-experimental design which compares students participating in CCLCs activities versus matched comparison students who do not participate in CCLC activities. The actual analysis used will be the approach that is the most rigorous for the data sources available. Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: 1. 2. 3. 4. What is the nature and level of implementation of the CCLC programs?  Interviews will be conducted with the school principal and site coordinator. All teachers will be surveyed. Students who participate in the program will be surveyed.  For the Mabelvale case study, observations of program components will also be conducted. A brief (20-min.) student focus group (n = 5 to 7 students) will also be conducted to ascertain students perspectives of the program components. What is the level of participation in CCLCs by African American students?  Participation records and observation data will be analyzed. What are the perceptions of teachers and school administrators regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  This question will be addressed via the teacher survey and administrator interviews. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians and students of program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  A parent survey consisting of closed- and open-ended items will be administered to parents. A student questionnaire will be administered at all schools. A focus group will be conducted with MMMS students. Table 1 below provides a summary of the research questions and associated data collection sources. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H Table 1. Summary of Instruments and Participants by Evaluation Question K Evaluation Question Primary Question: 1. Have the Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) programs been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Participants Data Sources LRSD Students ITBS and Arkansas Benchmark Reading and Math Subtests Supplemental Questions: 1. What is the nature and level of implementation of the CCLC programs? CCLC Program/School administrators CCLC Teachers CCLC Students Administrator Interviews Teacher Survey Student Survey Student Focus Group (case study) CCLC Observations (case study) A ] 2. What is the level of participation in CCLCs by African American students? CCLC Students School records/participation rosters CCLC Observations (case study) i 3. What are the perceptions of teachers and school administrators regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians and students of program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 2005 - 2006 Timeline September-February: Spring Semester\nMay-June: July-August: September 1: October 1: CCLC Teachers CCLC Program/School Administrators Teacher Survey Administrator Interviews K Parents of CCLC students CCLC Students Parent Survey Student Survey Student Focus Group (case study) \u0026gt;] li Planning/refmement, consultation with PRE and CCLC representatives, and instrument development\nreview by evaluation team Conduct observations, administer teacher questionnaire (at faculty meeting), conduct interviews and focus group, and administer parent and student questionnaires Analyses of records data\nanalyses of survey, observation, and interview data Analyses of achievement data\nanalyses of survey, observation, and interview data, submission of draft report of findings to PRE, review by evaluation team and feedback from PRE Delivery of final report to PRE LRSD delivers report to US District Court. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H H H H  LRSD 21\"* CCLC (Mabelvale) DRAFT Observation Tool 4 444 44 4 44 44 Date Day of Week Time in Time Out Have attendance Sheet  Yes/  No Which program was being observed? After school tutoring Homework Club Enrichment Club Summer Camp Other      Locale: Locale: Locale: Locale:  Library  other: Student composition Number: | Estimate of the number of students identified as African-American: [ Student Activity: What were the students doing? (Check all that apply and annotate briefly)  Literacy  Math  Computer use for: research, recreation, academic support/skiii development, homework  Exploring Environmental Science Medical Studies Technology  other: Were students working Alone? Purposively together? With an adult (teacher/volunteer/parent)? Adults: How many adults were present? Who were the responsible adults? What were the responsible adults doing? Were parents present?  community volunteer  CCLC staff Other: Yes No If yes, what were they doing?       I I I I ] ] [ o o ] Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H r  Describe the student/staff interaction: ID What materials were in use? n Overall Quality of Time and Social Atmosphere: How well did this slice of time represent a learning center? B Characteristic incius/Veness 4 All of the students were involved Time spent involved Students involved were involved all of the time Quality of activities: enqapement Quality of activities: academic relevance Individualized attention Activities were engaging for students Activities were relevant academically and adapted to the students needs Individualized attention was provided in a timely manner to students in need of it 3 Most of the students were involved Students who were involved were involved most of the time Activities were usually enqaqinq for students Activities were relevant to academics but less adapted to student needs Individual attention was provided when students asked 2 Some of the students were involved 1 Few to none of the students were involved B Inclusion of peers The students appeared to include all their peers in their group activities Students generally included one another in their group activities Students involved were involved some of the time Activities were marginally enqaqinq for students Academic relevance of activities was minimal or difficult to ascertain Individual attention was provided, but it was sporadic or delayed Student involvement was marginal at best Activities were not enqaqinq for students Activities were not academically relevant Students with needs for individual attention appeared to be ignored B B Interactions: social acceptability and resolution Most students were engaged effectively with others and in a socially acceptable manner Student interactions were occasionally marked by minor conflicts which were quickly and amicably resolved Social isolation appeared in a few instances (other than for disciplinary purposes) Student interactions were marked by minor conflicts which were somewhat resolved eventually Some students were clearly isolated by their peers Student interactions were contentious and adult intervention did not occur Additional Comments: Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H I F n n H H B BLRSD 2P' CCLC DRAFT Interview Items' Subjects'. Principal, Counselor, Coordinator What role(s) do you play in the operation of the 2P' CCLC at your school? 4 What is the primary purpose of your 2P CCLC program? Whom does your program serve? What type(s) of students do you believe benefited the most from the program? 4 Why? How? What do you see as the most successful aspects of the program? What challenges, if any, have there been to implementing the program? In terms of recruiting and retaining students, how successful do you think the program has been? What kinds of practices have contributed to success in recruiting and retaining students? If you do not think the program has been successful in recruitment and retention, what do you think has inhibited those efforts? How successful do you think the program has been in establishing a close partnership between the Center and your school? What kinds of practices have contributed to your success in establishing a close school/program relationship? If you do not think there is a close partnership, what do you think has hindered the relationship?  How successful do you think your program has been in engaging the parents of the students who participate in the program? What kind of practices have contributed to your success in this area? If you do not think the program has engaged the parents, what do you think has stood in the way? How successful do you think your program has been in initiating community involvement or partnerships for the program? ' Items modeled on the CEEP Evaluation of KentuckyE 21 Century Community Learning Centers. Year 2 Interim Report. P 37 ff. Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix HWhat kinds of practices have contributed to your success in this area? If you think you have not been successful, what do you think have been the barriers? Your program offers a variety of approaches (clubs) and program schedules for reaching students. Have you seen any differences in participation by students of various ethnicities in any of these programs? (sub questions to be modified dependent upon individual program design) Approaches Homework club Tutoring club Enrichment club Program schedules Saturday program Summer camp (2005\n2006) Before-school program After-school program Is there anything else that you think we should know about your programs efforts to provide students with a 2T Century Community Learning Center? Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix H  I 14 14 Id   n RI   n  MLRSD 2 TCCLC DRAFT Teacher Survey Items^ We are interested in knowing what you think about the 2P Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) program at your school. Your answers will remain anonymous. What is your role in the 2P Century Community Learning Center? (Mark the best description) 4 o o o I am part of the faculty at the school and I also work with the CCLC. I am part of the faculty at the school but I do not work with the CCLC. I am not part of the faculty\nI work only with the 2P Century Community Learning Center program. What is your opinion of the following statements about 2P Century Community Learning Center program at your school? (strongly agree\nagree\ndisagree\nstrongly disagree) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The CCLC program offers students enough choice of activities. The CCLC program offers academic help to students who need it. The CCLC offers students a safe place to be after school. The CCLC program appeals to a wide variety of students. The CCLC program reaches students families. How many of the students that you know who participate in the program are exhibiting the following (Almost all of them, many of them, some of them, a few of them, almost none of them)? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Improved academic performance Increased school attendance Improvement in how they relate to classmates Improvement in how they relate to teachers Improvement in how they behave in class Greater self-worth and self-esteem Involvement in community services Development as leaders Greater awareness of health issues Greater awareness of drug and violence issues Improvement in computer skills/computer literacy Open-ended: 1. What do you think are the strengths of the current 21 Century program at your school? 2. In what ways, if any, do you think the program at your school might be improved? w T. Some items derived from the Fort Worth after-school teacher survey (program teachers, atxxjt the program) Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix HLRSD 21 CCLC Possible Student Survey Items We would like to know what you think about your schools 2T Century Community Learning Center (CLCC). We will not use your name, but we do -want to know something about you. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. What grade are you in this year? (6, 7, 8) What is your gender? {male, female) Which ethnic group best describes you? {Native American, Asian American, African American, Hispanic American, Caucasian American, Other). Do you belong to the CLCC Homework Club? (Yes/No) Do you belong to the CLCC Tutoring Club? (Yes/No) Do you belong to the CCLC Enrichment Club? (Yes/No) Do you participate in the program before school? (Yes/No) Do you participate in the program after school? (Yes/No) Do you participate in the Saturday program? (Yes/No) Do you plan to attend the Summer Camp this summer? (Yes/No) I I n Please tell us how much you agree with these statements about the programs at your schools 2L' Century Community Learning Center, (strongly agree\nagree\ndisagree\nstrongly disagree) 1. I like the programs the community learning center offers. 2. There are enough different activities from which to choose. 3. I like the teachers who work in the community learning center program. 4. Being in the after-school program is better than other things I could be doing after school. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Teachers in the program give me help when I ask for it. I feel safe in the after-school program. Teachers and other adults in the program make me feel comfortable. I would sign up again for the program. 1 would tell other kids to sign up for the community learning center activities. n Please select the answer that best describes what you think. The Center has helped me to... 1. Like school more (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 2. Come to school more often (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 3. Get better grades (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 4. Behave better at school (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 5. Work better with other students (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) b. Feel better about myself (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 7. Talk to my teachers more (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) 8. Understand the importance of graduating from high school (a great deal, somewhat, a little, not at all) n n n n  Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix HLRSD 21 CCLC (Mabelvale) DRAFT Student Focus Group Items We would like to know what you think about Mabelvale's 21' Century Community Learning Center. 1. 2. What do you think are some of the best things at the Center? Do a lot of kids participate in the program? Why do you think that is? 3. What is the best thing about the Enrichment Club?  Homework Club? 4. How could the program be improved? The Tutoring Club? 5. Does participating in the program help you with your school work? How do you know? 6. Does this program make you want to come to school? Why or why not? 7. What have you learned about working with other kids by participating in this program? 8. Does this program offer you extra opportunities that you dont have a chance to investigate during the regular school day? If so, what are some of them? 9. Do you plan to take part in the Summer Camp this year? Why? Why not? 10. Do you like being part of the schools Community Learning Center? 11. What activities offered by the Learning Center have the grown-ups in your family enjoyed? Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix HAppendix I IB HI HI w Proposed Plan for Evaluation of Pre-Kindergarten Literacy BB IB  Bl Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis n Hl Hl HI HI Hl HI Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1fl fl Proposal for the 2005-2006 Evaluation of the Pre-Kindergarten Literacy Program Little Rock School District Outline Version Evaluation Questions Primary Evaluation Question 1. Has the pre-kindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of pre-kindergarten literacy programs in elementary schools with pre-kindergarten programs in the Little Rock School District in 2005-2006? 2. What is the level of participation in the pre-kindergarten program by African- American children relative to other ethnic groups at the school? 3. To what extent does the pre-kindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify African-American children who may be at-risk for academic failure and monitor progress? 4. What are the perceptions of pre-kindergarten teachers and paraprofessional teachers regarding the pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 5. What are the perceptions of the principal, kindergarten teachers, and first grade teachers in the school regarding the pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of pre-kindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Program Description The Little Rock School District recently developed a Curriculum System for Pre- K Literacy. The program is a comprehensive map which emphasizes communication. collaboration, and coherency. Implemented in fall 2005 in all pre-kindergarten classrooms in the district, the Map for Pre-K Literacy provides content guides with strategies and resources, concrete benchmarks for each month of the school year, and formative assessments for planning. The structure specifically addresses critical early Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 learning skills such as oral language, listening comprehension, vocabulary, phonological awareness, print awareness, and alphabet knowledge and early mathematics skills. Instructional orientations include group activities and learning centers using a variety of literature and hands-on activities which are theme-based. The curriculum map calls for recommended and required formative monthly assessments. pi PI Elementary Schools with Pre-K classrooms # of Pre-K Classrooms Bale Brady Baseline Fair Park Forest Park Chicot Western Hills Jefferson Carver Dodd Meadowcliff M. L. King Geyer Springs Pulaski Heights Romine Washington Wilson Woodruff Mabelvale Terry Fulbright Otter Creek Wakefield Watson Franklin Stephens Rockefeller McDermott 2 2 2 2 4 1 2 1 2 2 4 2 1 3 4 1 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 2 2 PI  pl PI   p  n TOTAL 69  Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1Proposed Design A mixed-methods design will be employed to address the research questions as follows: Primary Evaluation Question 1. Has the pre-kindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students?  A. 2005-2006 Pre-Kindergarten Students: A treatment school, pre- and post-test design will be employed for pre-kindergarten students. All elementary schools with pre-kindergarten classrooms will be examined.  Pretests'. Posttests'. Work Sampling System by Pearson Work Sampling System by Pearson  B. 2005-2006 Pre-Kindergarten Students as Incoming Kindergarten Students in Fall 2006: In fall 2006 (when pre-kindergarten students enter kindergarten)   comparisons will be made between students who attended pre-kindergarten in the district and those students who did not. Cunently, there are approximately 12 elementary schools in the district that administer Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) to incoming kindergarten students. c. H 2004-2005 Pre-Kindergarten Students: Within each of the elementary schools in the district, kindergarten students who participated in the Little Rock district pre-kindergarten program in 2004-2005 will be identified and their achievement gains compared to other kindergarten students in the district. M Pretests'. Posttests'. DRA or DIBELS (whichever has the most usable database) administered in Kindergarten 2005-2006 Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) Reading and Math Subtests H Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions fl 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of pre-kindergarten classroom environments and instruction at the schools implementing in 2005- 2006? fl  Observations of pre-kindergarten classrooms will be made at a sample of schools. A minimum of 15 classroom observations will be conducted. The pre-kindergarten teacher survey will address this question via closed-ended and open-ended items. Paraprofessional teachers in each pre-kindergarten classroom will also be surveyed through closed-ended and open-ended items. A random sample of 10 principals will be interviewed Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I v by phone. Kindergarten and first grade classroom teachers in schools with pre-kindergarten classrooms will also be surveyed. 2. What is the level of participation in the pre-kindergarten program by African- American children relative to other ethnic groups at the school?  Student records/archival data for 2005-2006 will be analyzed. 3. To what extent does the pre-kindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify African- American children who may be at-risk for academic failure and monitor progress?  Analysis of available pre-kindergarten screening and program assessment data, including the Early Screening Inventory. The pre-kindergarten teacher survey, paraprofessional teacher survey, principal interview, and classroom observations will also address this question. 4. What are the perceptions of pre-kindergarten teachers and paraprofessionals regarding the pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? p   The pre-kindergarten teacher survey and paraprofessional teacher survey will directly address this question. m 5. What are the perceptions of the principal, kindergarten teachers, and first grade teachers in the school regarding pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? n  The kindergarten and first grade classroom teacher survey will address this question via closed-ended and open-ended items. A random sample of principals will be interviewed by phone. w 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of pre-kindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?   The parents of pre-kindergarten children survey will be conducted to address this question via an instrument including closed- and open-ended items in schools with pre-kindergarten programs.    Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 Summary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question Evaluation Question Primary Question Participants Data Sources  1. Has the pre-kindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of Afiican-American students? All kindergarten and first grade students at 30 pre-kindergarten schools and other elementary schools Pre-kindergarten student participants within above samples DIBELS (fall 2006 - approximately 12 schools for incoming K students) ITBS (2005-2006 kindergarten data) Pre-kindergarten student program data - Work Sampling System scores (2005-2006 data)  Supplemental Questions II 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of pre-kindergarten classroom enviromnents and instruction at the 30 schools in 2005- 2006? All pre-kindergarten teachers All kindergarten and first grade classroom teachers at schools with pre-kindergarten programs Principals at pre-kindergarten schools Pre-kindergarten teacher survey Paraprofessional teacher survey Random sample of 10 principal phone interviews Kindergarten and first grade classroom teacher survey (faculty meeting) Pre-kindergarten classroom observations (min. of 15 observations)  H II 2. What is the level of participation in pre-kindergarten by African- American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? All pre-kindergarten schools School records/archival data   3. To what extent does the pre-kindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify African-American children who may be at-risk for academic failure and monitor progress? All pre-kindergarten teachers All pre-kindergarten teachers will provide student assessment data Principals at pre-kindergarten schools  Pre-kindergarten student program and assessment data including the Early Screening Inventory.  Pre-kindergarten teacher survey, paraprofessional teacher survey, and classroom observations (min. of 15 observations in at least 10 schools)   Random sample of 10 principal phone interviews Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 4. 5. 6. Summary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question, Continued Evaluation Question What are the perceptions of pre-kindergarten teachers and paraprofessional teachers regarding pre-kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? What are the perceptions of principal, kindergarten, and first grade classroom teachers regarding the pre- kindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of pre- kindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Fall 2005- February 2006 February-March April May-June July-August September 1 October 1 Participants  All pre-kindergarten teachers All K-3 classroom teachers in experienced RR schools Principals at pre-kindergarten schools Parents of pre-kindergarten children in schools with programs Timelines Data Sources Pre-kindergarten teacher survey Paraprofessional teacher survey Kindergarten and first grade classroom teacher survey (disaggregated by grade) Random sample of 10 principal phone interviews Pre-kindergarten parent survey Planning, refinement, and consultation with PRE and pre-kindergarten experts\ninstrument development\nreview by evaluation team Conduct observations. Pre-Kindergarten Teacher, Paraprofessional Teacher, Kindergarten Teacher and First Grade Teacher Surveys Pre-kindergarten school Principal Phone Interviews Pre-Kindergarten student data, records/archival data analyses Achievement data analyses/complete survey and interview analyses Submit draft report of findings to PRE for review by evaluation team and feedback from PRE. Deliver final report to PRE. LRSD submits final report. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 H I I I I I I I I I n  DRAFT Principal Interview Questions Little Rock School District Pre-K Schools I. General Information Describe the implementation of your schools PRE-K program.  How does the PRE-K program fit within the broader literacy initiative in your school?  Which of the components provided by the PRE-K literacy program do you feel are most effective? Are there any components that you feel are ineffective? Describe your role in the PRE-K program implementation. How would you describe teacher support for the PRE-K program? Can you think of specific positive or negative comments made by teachers about the program? What additional resources have been needed to support your PRE-K program?  Resources include time, space, materials and personnel. Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I IL Classroom Level Changes Specifically, what contributions has the PRE-K program made in terms of\n  Providing African American students with equal learning and performance opportunities? V  Reading instruction? H  Identifying those children at risk for academic failure (especially with regard to African American students V n  Teacher professional development? I  Monitoring of student progress and achievement? n How does your PRE-K program accommodate special needs children? I n HI. Results What differences in achievement have you seen in PRE-K students? Specifically, how has the program impacted the achievement of African American students? I Do you think that PRE-K program is helping to close the achievement gap between African American and white students? Explain. I How has the PRE-K program impacted classroom teachers? I Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1  RIV. Professional Development What specific training or support have you received as an administrator regarding the PRE-K program? What training or support have the PRE-K teachers received regarding the PRE-K program?  Any plans/suggestions for continuing the professional development process at your school?  V. Parental Involvement How would you describe parent support for the PRE-K program? Describe efforts to inform and involve parents. Are parents more involved now than in the past? How would you describe community support for the school in general, and the PRE-K students in particular? VI. Closure Do you have any suggestions to improve the PRE-K program? Are there any important aspects of program implementation that have not been mentioned today? Any additional comments you would like to make? Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix 1 I DRAFT PRE-K TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE School Name:_________________ General: Please evaluate using the scale provided'. Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree I have a thorough understanding of my schools PRE-K program.____________________________________ I have received adequate initial and ongoing professional development/training for implementation of the PRE-K program._____________ Professional development provided by the district has been valuable.__________________________________ The principal is an effective instructional leader. Teachers are given sufficient planning time to implement the PRE-K program.____________________ Student achievement has been positively impacted by the PRE-K program.____________________________ Overall, this program is valuable for improving the achievement of African-American students._________ I have time to collaborate with other PRE-K teachers.____________________________________________ I have adequate materials to implement the program.___________________________________________ The content areas presented in the curriculum map are appropriate for pre-k literacy instruction._______ The monthly benchmark goals are realistic for pre-k literacy programs.__________________________________ The interim and anchor assessments in the pre-K literacy curriculum are useful in assessing growth and progress._______________________________________ I have a thorough understanding of the pre-k curriculum map.___________________________________ Because of the PRE-K program, more parents are involved in the school.______________________________ Preschool teachers in the school are generally supportive of the PRE-K program._________________ Teachers in the school (not preschool teachers) are generally supportive of the PRE-K program._______ Teachers are encouraged to communicate concerns, questions, and constructive ideas regarding the PRE-K program.__________________________________ The PRE-K program is useful in monitoring progress of African American students.____________ The PRE-K program is useful as a screening tool for assessing at-risk African American students._______ With the PRE-K program, children are excited about learning. u I I I n H n  Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I  Effectiveness of PRE-K Literacy Components: Please rate the effectiveness of the following components: Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree The PRE-K program is valuable in preparing children for kindergarten._____________________ Instructional elements of the PRE-K program assessments, programs, materialsare based on scientifically-based reading research.___________ Because of the PRE-K program, systematic and explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, oral language, vocabulary, concepts of print, and comprehension occurs daily in our schools classrooms.______________________________ The literacy and language components are effective for reading readiness.________________ Group activities engage the students and complement instruction.______________________ Learning centers engage the students and complement instruction. DEMOGRAPHICS: How many years of experience do you have as a PRE-K teacher? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ How many years of experience do you have as an employee in any school? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ How many years of experience do you have as an employee in this school? Less than one yr.___ 1-5 yrs___ 6-10 yrs____ 11-15 yrs___15 or more yrs___ What is the highest level of education you have completed? High School Diploma or less___Associates Degree/Some college Bachelors Degree____Masters Degree____ Degree beyond Masters   What best describes your cultural background? American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander African American Hispanic/Latino___Caucasian Multi-Racial Gender: Male____ Female Age range: 29 yrs. or less 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or older Open-Ended: What are the most effective aspects of the PRE-K program? What are the least effective? Do you think the PRE-K program should be continued? Why or Why Not? Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I DRAFT CLASSROOM TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE PRE-K SCHOOL PROGRAM School Name: Grade Level: Please describe your understanding of the PRE-K program at your school: n I have a thorough understanding of my schools PRE- K program.__________________________________________ The PRE-K program will positively impact students at the school._________________________________________ The PRE-K program will improve the overall achievement of African American students at this school._______________________________________________ Our school has a sufficient number of preschool teachers._____________________________________________ Preschool teachers are positive about the PRE-K program.____________________________________________ The PRE-K program will help prepare students for success in kindergarten.______________________________ The PRE-K program can help identify at-risk students._____________________________________________ The PRE-K program will prepare students for reading readiness.___________________________________ It is my understanding the components of the PRE-K program are based on scientifically-based research. The principal supports the PRE-K program._________ Because of the PRE-K program, systematic and explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, oral language, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension occurs daily in our schools classrooms.______________ The PRE-K program is actively engaging parents in their childs learning. Strongly Agret Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix I M M DEMOGRAPHICS: How many years of experience do you have as an employee in any school? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs____ 11-15 yrs____ 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ II How many years of experience do you have as an employee in this school? Less than one yr.___ 1-5 yrs___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs___15 or more yrs___ II What is the highest level of education you have completed? High School Diploma or less___ Associates Degree/Some college____ II Bachelors Degree Masters Degree____Degree beyond Masters What best describes your cultural background? II American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander African American Hispanic/Latino___Caucasian Multi-Racial II Gender: Male Female Age range: 29 yrs. or less___30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or older II II Open-Ended: What are the most effective aspects of the PRE-K program? Il What are the least effective? Il Do you think the PRE-K program should be continued? Why or Why Not? II II II If Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix I  DRAFT PRE-K PARAPROFESSIONAL TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE   School Name:  General: Please evaluate using the scale provided:  Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Agree  I have a thorough understanding of my schools PRE-K program.________________________________ I have received training and development regarding my work with PRE-K students._______ The PRE-K teacher in my classroom is an effective leader._________________________________ The principal at this school is an effective instructional leader._____________________________ I am able to communicate concerns regarding the students with the PRE-K classroom teacher. The classroom teacher and I spend time planning instructional activities._________________ Student achievement has been positively impacted by the PRE-K program._______________ Overall, this program is valuable for improving the achievement of African-American students. I have time to collaborate with other PRE-K paraprofessionals at this school._________________ I have adequate materials in the classroom to do nyjob-_________________________________________ Pre-K classroom teachers in the school are generally supportive of the program.____________ Pre-K Paraprofessionals in the school are generally supportive of the program.____________ Children in the PRE-K class are excited about learning.________________________________________ The PRE-K program is useful in monitoring progress of African-American students._________ The PRE-K program is valuable in preparing children for kindergarten.______________________ My role as a PRE-K Paraprofessional is valuable in the PRE-K classroom.________________________ Mentoring and/or coaching I receive from the Pre-K classroom teacher is helpful to me._______ Because of the Pre-K program, more parents are involved in the school.   Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I DEMOGRAPHICS: How many years experience do you have as a PRE-K Paraprofessional? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ How many years experience do you have as an employee in any school? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ How many years experience do you have as an employee in this school? 5 years or less___ 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs 16-20 yrs___20 or more yrs__ What is the highest level of education you have completed? High School Diploma or less Associates Degree/Some college Bachelors Degree Masters Degree Degree beyond Masters What best describes your cultural background? American Indian or Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander African American Hispanic/Latino___Caucasian Multi-Racial Gender: Male Female II Age Range: 29 yrs. or less 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or older II OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS: H M M II What are the most effective aspects of the PRE-K program? II What are the least effective? Il II Do you think the PRE-K program should be continued? Why or Why Not? Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I DRAFT LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PRE-K PARENT QUESTIONNAIRE   Dear Parent/Guardian: We would like to know what you think about your childs preschool experience. Please take a few minutes to complete the following survey. All responses are completely confidential.  Ethnicity of your Child:  African American Caucasian_______ Hispanic________ Asian___________ Other   Gender: Male Age:__ Female Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree strongly Disagree My child enjoys the preschool class. I believe my childs preschool class is adequately preparing him/her for kindergarten.________________________ My child is excited about learning. I receive information from my childs teacher regarding units or themes of study.________________________________ My child is becoming reading ready due to preschool._____________ I receive feedback regarding my childs language skills. My child enjoys group activities in the preschool class.___________________ My child enjoys the learning centers in the preschool class.________________ My childs preschool teacher is an effective instructor.__________________ My child enjoys looking at books/ being read to at home._______________ My child brings home information from the school that helps me understand what he/she is learning. 1 like the school my child is attending. I believe my child can get a good education at this school. I believe African American students can achieve at this school.  Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix I R  What are the best things about your childs preschool experience? What changes would you like to see in the preschool program at this school? M II II II II II II II H Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix I  Appendix J   Proposed Plan for Evaluation of Read 180 I   Center for Research in Educational Policy University of Memphis   I Quarterly Written Update March I, 2006 Appendix J * Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width), Tabs: 5.75\", Centered + 5.88\", Centered     a I  Proposal for the Evaluation of Read 180 in the Little Rock School District: Outline Version DRAFT COPY ONLY Evaluation Questions  Primary Evaluation Question-. 1. Has the Read 180 program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions:  1. What are the quality and level of implementation of Read 180 at the schools implementing it in 2005-06? 2. What is the level of participation in Read 180 by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? 3. What are the perceptions of Read 180 teachers regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. M 5. What are the perceptions of other teachers in the school regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Read 180 students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Program Description H Read 180 is a reading intervention program that is aimed at assisting struggling adolescent readers. Currently, five middle schools and all eight high schools in LRSD use this program. Students are targeted to participate in the program based on results from the Arkansas Benchmark Exam. Students that participate in the program typically spend equal portions of their 90-minute English or Language Arts class working with adaptive software, reading independently, and receiving instruction in large and small group settings. H I Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Une width). Tabs: 5.75\", Centered + 5.88\", Centered Appendix J fl I  Proposed Design H A mixed-methods design will be employed to address the research questions as follows: Primary Evaluation Question'. n 1. Has the Read 180 program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? The preliminary plan is discussed below. The actual analysis used will be the approach that is the most rigorous for the available data sources. I A. Whole School'. A treatment-control school, pretest-posttest design will be employed in Grades 6-9. The analysis will control for pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. It may be decided to examine (a) all schools relative to the entire district middle and high school database or (b) a stratified random sample of Read 180 schools relative to matched control schools (this will only be possible in the middle schools). p n B. Read 180 Sub sample: Within each of the Read 180 schools, students who participated in the program will be identified and their achievement gains compared to predicted scores based on school status, student pretest, gender, ethnicity, and SES. n Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions: n 1. What is the quality and level of implementation of Read 180 at the schools implementing it in 2005-06? n Read 180 teachers will be surveyed and a random sample will be interviewed. The principals will also be interviewed. Observations of Read 180 sessions will be made at a sample of schools. A minimum of 10 observations will be conducted. To the extent resources are available an attempt will be made to observe at all the sites. n 2. What is the level of participation in Read 180 by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? n Student-level Read 180 records/archival data will be analyzed. n 3. What are the perceptions of Read 180 teachers regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? n All of the Read 180 teachers will be surveyed, and a random sample will be asked to participate in brief interviews to address this question. 4. What are the perceptions of other teachers in the school regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? I Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Appendix) * Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width). Tabs: 5.75\", Centered + 5.88\", Centered -n 4i A survey will be developed and administered to non-Read 180 teachers to address this question. 5. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Read 180 students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  A parent survey will be administered to address this question. Summary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question   fl fl fl fl   fl fl Evaluation Question Primary Question: 1. Has the Read 180 program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African- American students? Supplemental Questions: 1. What are the quality and level of implementation of Read 180 at the schools implementing it in 2005-06? 2. What is the level of participation in Read 180 by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? 3. What are the perceptions of Read 180 teachers regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 4. What are the perceptions of other teachers in the school Participants Data Sources Read 180 students ITBS and Benchmark Exam  Read 180 teachers  Principals at Read 180 schools  Read 180 students All Read 180 schools Read 180 teachers Non-Read 180 Teachers at schools using the program I Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006  Read 180 Teacher Survey  Read 180 Teacher Interviews  Principal Interviews  Read 180 Observations (min. of 10 1-hour observations) SOM/Read 180 SCU/Quality Assessment Form  Read 180 Student Survey (all Read 180 students)  Read 180 Student Focus Group (random sample)  School level Read 280 reports  Read 180 Teacher Survey  Teacher Survey (random selection of teachers) Appendix J * Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width). Tabs: 5.75\", Centered + 5.88\", CenteredI  Evaluation Question regarding program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 5. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Read 180 students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Timelines January February-April May-June July-August September 1 October 1 Participants Data Sources  v Parents of Read 180 students  Read 180 Parent Survey H W  Planning, refinement with PRE and other LRSD staff  Instrument development  Begin observations  Continue observations  Principal and teacher interviews  Administer parent and teacher questionnaires  Data analysis on non-achievement data sources  Achievement data analysis  Submit draft report of findings to PRE  Receive feedback from PRE and evaluation teams  Submit final report to PRE for Board approval the same month  LRSD submits final report to court n n n n I n n n 1 Quarterly Written Update March I, 2006 Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width). Tabs: 5.75\", Centered + 5.88\", Centered Appendix J * n  I   ( Pead 180 Questionnaire For Non-Read 180 Teachers Draft Copy Only (NOTE: The Read 180 Questionnaire will be presented to teachers on a form that can be scanned) Circle the grade level(s) you teach: 6 7 8 9 Circle your ethnicity: Caucasian African American Circle your gender. Hispanic Asian Male I Multi-Ethnic Female Please let us know what you think about the effectiveness of Read 180 by rating the following items from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree. Arc you able to identify which students are taking or have taken the Read 180 classes? Yes No If \"yes\" please answer the flowing questions: Read 180 Items 1. I have an understanding of the Read 180 program _______goals._________________________________________ 2. I have an understanding of the Read 180 program classroom implementation (how the classes are _______structured).____________________________________ 3. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes demonstrate continuous _______improvement in literacy skills_____________________ 4. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes submit work that reflects _______improved writing._______________________________ 5. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes show more willingness to read _______aloud in class.__________________________________ 6. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes demonstrate improved _______written and orol vocabulary skills._________________ 7. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes demonstrate better test _______taking skills.___________________________________ 8. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes show increased _______comprehension of assigned reading._______________ 9. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes show increased attention and interest in learning. Quarterly Written Update March 1,2006 Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree strongly * Agree Appendix J * { Formatted Table Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line widfti), Tabs: 5.75\", Centered + 5.88\", Centered10. The students in my class who are taking or have taken Read 180 classes have improved classroom behavior. H Open ended:  What do you think are the strengths of the Read 180 program?  What do you think are the weaknesses of the Read 180 program?  What changes do you recommend for the Read 180 program?  Should your school continue using Read 180? _Yes _No Briefly explain why_____________________________________ I V H Quarterly Written Update March 1, 2006 Appendix) n n n n n n I n Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width). Tabs: 5.75\", Centered + 5.88\", Centered n  Survey of Computer Use for Read 180 Draft Copy Only School Observer Name Observation  Date Grade Observed 6 7 3 9  Number of Students in Read 180 Class (by ethnicity):_____African American _____Non-African American How many computers were available for Read 180? ___One ___2-4 ___5-10 ___11 or more Computer Configuration and Use How frequently did malfunctions occur on computers used for Read 180? ___Never ___Rarely ___Occasionally ___Frequently ___Extensively Most of the computers used for Read 180 were: ___Up-to-date ___Aging but adequate ___Outdated/limited capacity  Read 180 Computer Activities______________ In which subject areas did students complete Read 180 computer work (check all that were observed)? ___Reading Comprehension ___Vocabulary ___Spelling  What was the overall level of African American student attention, interest, and engagement while using the Read 180 computer program? ___Low ___Moderate ___High TALLY the types of questions students asked while using the computer Read 180. ___Content area (e.g. how to solve a problem\nthe meaning of a word) ___Software use (e.g., how to log in\nhow to move to next section, how to take a test) ___Computer use (e.g., how to get the mouse or keyboard to work properly) ___Non-Read 180 questions, (e.g.. Do 1 have to sit next to John? Can I go to the restroom?) TALLY each time the teacher provided the following types of instruction specifically for student use of Read 180 computer activities: ___Content area (e.g. reading, vocabulary) ___Software use (e.g., how to log in, find correct lesson) ___Computer use (e.g., locate software, use mouse) ___Classroom behavior rules ___No Instructions were given Observer Notes: What was the overall level of NON-African American student attention, interest, and engagement while using the Read 180 program? ___Low ___Moderate ___High What was the level of academically focused time while students were using the computer for Read 180? ___Low ___Moderate ___High I Quarterly Written Update March I, 2006 Appendix J Formatted: Left, Border: Top: (Single solid line, Auto, 1 pt Line width), Tabs: 5.75\", Centered + 5.88\", Centered Draft Copy Only Parent/Guardian Consent Form Hl * Dear parent or guardian, As part of a study conducted by the Center for Research in Educational Policy, The University of Memphis, and endorsed by the Little Rock School District, we are requesting permission for your child to participate in a group interview of 5 to 7 students from your childs school. During the group interview (focus group), a trained researcher will ask your child questions regarding his/her participation in the Read 180 program (your son's/daughter's language arts/reading class). The questions are designed to help us find out how well the Read 180 program is helping to improve student reading skills and learning. IB The focus group should take approximately 20 minutes and will only pertain to the Read 180 class that your child is taking. The focus group will be conducted during a Read 180 class. Individual responses to the questions will not be seen by anyone at the school, and the identity of individuals participating in the focus group will remain confidential. The responses to the focus group will be reported together in summary form to school personnel. I n Please note that your child is not required to participate in the focus group. Your permission is required to participate. If you give permission, please have your child return the completed form to his/her teacher. n\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":"geh_vacl_46","title":"Herbert Holmes interview","collection_id":"geh_vacl","collection_title":"Voices Across The Color Line Oral History Collection, 2005-2006","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["Africa, 7.1881, 21.09375","Somalia, -6.0, 48.0","United States, Alabama, Butler County, Greenville, 31.8296, -86.61775","United States, Alabama, Macon County, Tuskegee, 32.42415, -85.69096","United States, Georgia, Atlanta Metropolitan Area, 33.8498, 84.4383","United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Adams Park, 33.71205, -84.45687","United States, Georgia, Fulton County, East Point, 33.67955, -84.43937","United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Grant Park, 33.73677, -84.37187","United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Piedmont Park, 33.78649, -84.37382","United States, Michigan, Wayne County, Detroit, 42.33143, -83.04575","United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036"],"dcterms_creator":["Holmes, Herbert, 1944-","Merritt, Carole"],"dc_date":["2006-02-23"],"dcterms_description":["In this interview, Herbert Holmes describes his family's involvement in desegregating public schools and public golf courses in Atlanta, Georgia. He also discusses the tension and conflict within the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change organization and within the black community. Many of the leaders of the old guard felt uncomfortable with the plan for change scripted by the younger generation. Holmes ends the interview with his assessment of the black community in Atlanta.","Herbert Holmes was born in Detroit, Michigan in 1944. His family moved to Tuskegee, Alabama in 1947 and then to Atlanta, Georgia in 1949. His father was originally from Atlanta but moved to Detroit during World War II for employment reasons. He graduated from Morehouse College and worked at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change on a documentation project."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":["VIS 180.015.001"],"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["MSS 990, Voices Across the Color Line oral history transcriptions, Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--History","Civil rights","Civil rights leaders--Georgia--Atlanta","Civil rights movements","Civil rights--Georgia--Atlanta","Racism","Race relations","Race relations--Georgia--Atlanta","Politics \u0026 government--Georgia","Politics \u0026 government--Georgia--Atlanta","Education","Education--Georgia--Atlanta","Sports--Georgia","Religion","Alfred Tub Holmes Golf Course (Atlanta, Ga.)","Tuskegee Institute","English Avenue School (Atlanta, Ga.)","Lincoln Country Club (Atlanta, Ga.)","University of Georgia","Lockheed Corporation","Davis Brother's Restaurants","Bobby's Barber Shop","Clark University (Atlanta, Ga.)","Morehouse College (Atlanta, Ga.)"],"dcterms_title":["Herbert Holmes interview"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://www.youtube.com/embed/bEYVUhOCSsk"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm/ref/collection/VACL/id/46"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S Code) Permission for use must be cleared through The Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":["oral histories (literary works)","moving images"],"dcterms_extent":["1:56 hours"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Holmes, Alfred Fountain","Holmes, Hamilton, 1941-1995","Holmes, Herbert","Holmes, Isabella Campfield","Till, Emmett, 1941-1955","Bell, Howard","Hill, Jesse, 1926-2012","King, Lonnie C., 1936-","Harding, Vincent","Bennett, Lerone, Jr., 1928-2018","Mays, Benjamin E. (Benjamin Elijah), 1894-1984","X, Malcolm, 1925-1965"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"geh_vacl_53","title":"Billie Gaines interview","collection_id":"geh_vacl","collection_title":"Voices Across The Color Line Oral History Collection, 2005-2006","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249","United States, Georgia, Atlanta Metropolitan Area, 33.8498, 84.4383","United States, Georgia, Chatham County, Savannah, 32.08354, -81.09983"],"dcterms_creator":["Gaines, Billie Davis, 1937-","Merritt, Carole"],"dc_date":["2006-02-16"],"dcterms_description":["In this interview, Billie Gaines details her childhood and the importance of education in her family. She discusses the issues and failures of the Atlanta Public School System since desegregation and the resegregation in many school districts, due to the expansion of the suburbs and the introduction of different ethnic groups in the Atlanta area. Gaines ends the interview with her assessment of minorities in the museum profession.","Ms. Gaines was born in 1937 at Tuskegee Institute in Alabama and spent early childhood in Greenwood,a village for faculty housing at Tuskegee. Her family lived in Savannah before moving to Atlanta, Georgia in 1949. Ms. Gaines attended Booker T. Washington High School and then Vassar College. She earned her PhD in Russian from Bryn Mawr."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":["VIS 180.012.001"],"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center, 130 West Paces Ferry RD, Atlanta, GA 30305"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["MSS 990, Voices Across the Color Line oral history transcriptions, Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--History","Civil rights","Racism","Race discrimination","Race relations--Georgia--Atlanta","Education--Georgia--Atlanta","Tuskegee Institute","Talladega College","Atlanta University Center (Ga.)","Booker T. Washington High School (Atlanta, Ga.)","Rich's (Retail store)","Washington Post Company","Vassar College"],"dcterms_title":["Billie Gaines interview"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://www.youtube.com/embed/sNFsbYo5v6c"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm/ref/collection/VACL/id/53"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S Code) Permission for use must be cleared through The Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":["2:44:49 hours"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Gaines, Billie","Washington, Booker T., 1856-1915","Carver, George Washington, 1864?-1943","Collen, Thomas Nelson"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"geh_vacl_43","title":"William Fowlkes interview","collection_id":"geh_vacl","collection_title":"Voices Across The Color Line Oral History Collection, 2005-2006","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Atlanta Metropolitan Area, 33.8498, 84.4383","United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, Auburn Avenue, 33.755509, -84.376596","United States, Georgia, Walton County, Monroe, 33.79484, -83.71323","United States, Tennessee, Davidson County, Nashville, 36.16589, -86.78444","United States, Tennessee, Obion County, Union City, 36.42423, -89.05701"],"dcterms_creator":["Fowlkes, William, 1914-2008","Merritt, Carole"],"dc_date":["2006-02-14"],"dcterms_description":["In this interview, William Fowlkes discusses his experience with racial segregation and discrimination growing up in Tennessee. He describes his employment as managing editor and reporter at the Atlanta Daily World and several other black publications. Fowlkes was employed at the Atlanta Daily World during the teacher pay equalization struggle and the lynching of four African Americans in Monroe, Georgia. He ends the interview with his assessment of current race relations in Atlanta and by addressing the need for economic development in the black community.","William Fowlkes was born in Union City, Tennessee. He graduated from high school in Dyersburg, Tennessee and moved to Atlanta, Georgia in the 1930s after graduating from Tennessee State in Nashville, Tennessee."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":["VIS 180.011.001"],"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center, 130 West Paces Ferry RD, Atlanta, GA 30305"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["MSS 990, Voices Across the Color Line oral history transcriptions, Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--History","Civil rights","Racism","Race discrimination","Race relations--Georgia--Atlanta","Race relations","Newspaper carriers--Georgia--Atlanta","Education","Economic \u0026 social conditions--Georgia--Atlanta","Atlanta Daily World (Firm)","Life and Casualty Insurance Company of Nashville","Butler Street YMCA (Atlanta, Ga.)","Associated Negro Press","Ebony Magazine","Jet Magazine"],"dcterms_title":["William Fowlkes interview"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://www.youtube.com/embed/WVKxbj6iNWc"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm/ref/collection/VACL/id/43"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S Code) Permission for use must be cleared through The Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":["56:50 minutes"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Fowlkes, William, 1914-2008","Scott, C. A. (Cornelius Adolphus), 1908-2000","Dobbs, John Wesley, 1882-1961","Johnson, John","Scott, Alexis","King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"geh_vacl_40","title":"George Coleman interview","collection_id":"geh_vacl","collection_title":"Voices Across The Color Line Oral History Collection, 2005-2006","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Atlanta Metropolitan Area, 33.8498, 84.4383"],"dcterms_creator":["Coleman, George, 1922-2008","Merritt, Carole"],"dc_date":["2006-02-07"],"dcterms_description":["In this interview, George Coleman recalls his experience as a police reporter for the Atlanta Daily World. He begins his interview describing his childhood and living in a segregated neighborhood in Atlanta, Georgia and graduating from Booker T. Washington High School in 1939. He talks about enlisting in the armed services and attending Hampton Institute before returning to Atlanta during the height of racial segregation in the South. George Coleman ends his interview with an assessment of the Atlanta Daily World and recites the end of Alfred Lord Tennyson’s poem, Ulysses.","George Coleman was born in Atlanta, Georgia in 1922. He graduated from Booker T. Washington High School and then attended Hampton Institute. He enlisted in the army in 1941 and after being discharged attended the school of journalism at Lincoln University in Missouri. After graduation he secured a job at the Atlanta Daily World as a police reporter."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":["VIS 180.005.001"],"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center, 130 West Paces Ferry RD, Atlanta, GA 30305"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["MSS 990, Voices Across the Color Line oral history transcriptions, Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--History","Civil rights","Racism","World War, 1939-1945","Race discrimination","Race relations--Georgia--Atlanta","Education","Student movements--Georgia","Newspaper carriers--Georgia--Atlanta","Newspapers--Georgia--Atlanta","Atlanta Daily World (Firm)","Lincoln University (Jefferson City, Mo.)","Booker T. Washington High School (Atlanta, Ga.)","Rich's (Retail store)","World War II","Journalism","Race relations","Civil rights movements"],"dcterms_title":["George Coleman interview"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://www.youtube.com/embed/a9CDpnqnMyA"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm/ref/collection/VACL/id/40"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S Code) Permission for use must be cleared through The Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":["1:09:57 hours"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Coleman, George, -2008","Scott, C. A. (Cornelius Adolphus), 1908-2000","Folkes, William"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":274,"next_page":275,"prev_page":273,"total_pages":6797,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":3276,"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}}]}}