{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1478","title":"\"School Laws of Arkansas, Acts of 1999,\" Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, Little Rock, Ark., Volume I","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":["Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators"],"dc_date":["1999"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Finance","Employee rights","Teachers","School employees","School facilities","School districts","School management and organization","School administrators","Student assistance programs","Education--Standards","School enrollment","Parents","Educational innovations","School boards","School board members","School buildings","School improvement programs","Education and state","School superintendents","Student activities"],"dcterms_title":["\"School Laws of Arkansas, Acts of 1999,\" Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, Little Rock, Ark., Volume I"],"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/1478"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["62 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1494","title":"\"School Laws of Arkansas, Acts of 1999,\" Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, Little Rock, Ark., Volume II","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":["Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators"],"dc_date":["1999"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Finance","Education--Standards","Education and state","Educational innovations","Educational law and legislation","School administrators","School board members","School boards","School buildings","School discipline","School districts","School employees","School enrollment","School facilities","School improvement programs","School management and organization","School superintendents","Teachers","Parents","Students","Student activities","Student assistance programs","Employee rights"],"dcterms_title":["\"School Laws of Arkansas, Acts of 1999,\" Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, Little Rock, Ark., Volume II"],"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/1494"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["230 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_935","title":"'Status Report,'' North Little Rock School District","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational statistics","School discipline","School employees","School enrollment","School facilities","School improvement programs","Student activities","Student assistance programs","Gifted persons"],"dcterms_title":["'Status Report,'' North Little Rock School District"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/935"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\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":"bcas_bcmss0837_711","title":"Student achievement","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2004"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Student achievement"],"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/711"],"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\nDate: June 16, 1999 To: All Associates From: Re: LRSD Collective Responsibility Proposal Attached is a draft document that Bonnie Lesley would like for us to look over. She wants our feedback, but would like for us to keep the document in-house since its only a draft at this point. Her proposal is in response to Dr. Carnines request that Bonnie develop accountability processes, standards, rewards, and sanctions for the LRSD. Hes on a value-added kick (business buzzword that the business world is about tired of but the education world is just now discovering), which youll note in the document. Bonnie tried to weave in the state accountability standards to avoid duplication or conflicts, thereby hopefully forestalling those annoying feelings of confusion and overload that are on the loose in the LRSD these days. Bonnie welcomes all comments, questions, etc. When you have a chance, just type up any comments and 111 put them all together and give them to her with no names attached. Thanks.?-i5 --1 Collective Responsibility for Student Achievement definition of \"Collective Responsibility\" \"Collective Responsibility\" means that all the adults in the district and at each school hold themselves accountable for all the students' meeting the challenging behavior and academic content standards and benchmarks established by the Board of Education, by the state for accreditation, by federally funded programs, and by external funders of reform initiatives approved by the Board of Education. District-level staff share with school-level staffs in the \"collective responsibility\" for school improvement. This critically important attitude is developed and nurtured through professional learning communities established by the District and each school. In addition, the Superintendent shall ensure that all job descriptions of appropriate District-level and building-level staff\nannual work plans\nDistrict-level processes and schoollevel parameters for decision-making\npersonnel hiring, assignment, promotion, and evaluation systems\nand the professional development programs are results-based and aligned with the improvement indicators established in the Quality Index. Reporting Responsibilities The Superintendent shall report to the Board of Education annually on progress related to the implementation of the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. In addition, so that the community is also informed on the District's progress in meeting expected improvement goals, the following reports must be submitted to the Board of Education in open sessions. district Annual Performance Report The Annual Performance Report is to be submitted to the Board of Education no later than August 30 annually. It shall include data relating to each of the quality indicators, including the baseline year data so that progress can be identified. The Annual Performance Report shall also include the accreditation status and accountability status for each school, as determined by the State of Arkansas. 1Building-Level Report Cards Building-Level Report Cards shall be published and distributed to parents and other interested patrons annually. These report cards shall include the data mandated by the State of Arkansas, but also school data relating to improvement gains and to other quality indicators not included by the State. School principals shall disseminate these reports to all the staff members and parents in their school community and make them available to interested patrons. At least one parent meeting shall be conducted annually by the Campus Leadership Team and the principal to discuss the performance of the school and planned short- and long- range improvements. Accreditation and Accountability Status If a school has been identified for \"school improvement,\" as per Title I regulations and/or if the school is conditionally accredited or nonaccredited, then the designation and an explanation of its implications, as well as the accountability status of the school as defined by the State shall be included in the building-level report card. Program Evaluations The results of any internal program evaluation studies or evaluations of grant-funded projects are to be provided to the Board of Education within a month of their submission to the Superintendent and/or to the funding organization. Academic Quality Indicators The Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) establishes the following academic indicators based on the State's criterion-referenced tests: 2Indicator____________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests Goal (Definition)______________ 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in reading and writing literacy. The percent of students performing at or above the \"proficient\" level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion- referenced tests will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in mathematics. The percent of students performing at or above the \"proficient\" level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Grade Level(s) Grades 4, 6,8 Performance on State- AAandated Criterion- Referenced Tests 1007o of a school's secondary students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in Algebra I. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the \"proficient\" level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Secondary 3100% of a school's secondary students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in Geometry. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the \"proficient\" level in Geometry will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 100% of a school's secondary students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in Literacy. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the \"proficient\" level in Literacy will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. J Additional District-Selected Indicators The following additional academic indicators have been established by the Little Rock School District: Indicator Performance on bistrict-adopted kindergarten literacy test Goal (Definition)______________ 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in literacy. Grade Level(s) Kindergarten The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year, 4Performance on district-adopted grade 1 literacy test 1007o of a school's students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in literacy. Grade 1 Performance on SAT9, a norm-referenced fest The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year.________________ 1007o of a school's students shall perform at or above the 50 percentile in reading. .th Grades 5, 7,10 The percent of students performing at or above the 50 .th percentile in reading will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the bO^ percentile in mathematics. The percent of students performing at or above the 50 percentile in mathematics will |th meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 5Performance on district-adopted quarterly criterion- referenced tests 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in reading each quarter. Grades 2-11 The percent of students performing at or above the \"proficient\" level in reading each quarter will meet or exceed the improvement goal. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in mathematics each quarter. The percent of students performing at or above the \"proficient\" level in mathematics each quarter will meet or exceed the improvement goal. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 6Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Enrollment in Algebra I in grade 7 or 8 Enrollment in Foreign Language in Grade 8 1007o of middle and high school students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year. The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year.____________________ 1007o of a middle school's students will be enrolled in Algebra I in either grade 7 or 8. The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I in grades 7 or 8 will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year.________________ 1007o of a middle school's students will enroll in Level I or Level II of a foreign language in grade. The percent of students enrolled in Level I or Level II of a foreign language in grade 8 will meet or exceed the improvement goal I each year. Grades 6-12 Grade 7 or 8 Grade 8 7Honors Seal on High School diploma 1007o of a high school's students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas. Grades 9-12 Taking the ACT The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year.____________________ 100% of a high school's students will take the ACT. Grades 11-12 Performance on the ACT The percent of students taking the ACT will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 1007o of a high school's students will earn a score of at least 19 on the ACT. Grades 11-12 Taking Advanced Placement Examinations The percent of students earning a score of 19 or above will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year.____________________ 100% of a high school's seniors will take at least one AP examination. The percent of students taking at least one AP examination will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Srades 11-12 8Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations Completion of Graduation Requirements 1007o of a high school's students taking AP examinations will score a \"3\" or above. The percent of students earning a score of \"3\" or above on AP examinations will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 1007o of a high school's seniors will complete all the graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony, Grades 11-12 Grade 12 The percent of seniors meeting all graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year, A school's performance on these district-selected indicators may be reflected in a local supplement to the state-mandated Building-Level Report Card or as a part of the narrative in the Tier III report that becomes a part of the state's Building-Level Report Card. Improvement Goals Every year, each school's goal for annual rate of improvement will be determined by dividing the total percent of students below the desired performance level by 10. \"Value-added\" improvement goals will be established based on statistical information provided by the testing vendor(s). Value-Added Gains The bistrict-adopted criterion-referenced tests for grades K-11 will be administered to provide pre- and post-test scores so that gains of individual students may be measured annually. Only those scores of students who were 9in the school the previous test administration will be used in calculating value-added gains. The purpose of this measure is to be able to determine the extent to which a school adds value\" through individual students' gains. In other words, regardless of whether students attain the \"proficient\" level at any given grade, the District is interested in whether the students progressed toward proficiency\" during that year. Rewards for Schools The District shall develop a system to reward (a) schools absolutely meeting all the State's performance indicators and (b) schools demonstrating improvement: meeting a preponderance of the improvement goals established by the State of Arkansas and LRSD. The District shall determine a point system and a definition of predonderance.\" Quality Schools and Improving Schools Quality Schools and Improving schools may be recognized and rewarded in the following ways, as determined by the Superintendent\na. A presentation will be made to the Board of Education on the school's achievements involving both staff and parents, a press release commending the school's performance will be issued, and schools will be featured in District publications, on cable television, and on the web page. b. The school may be designated as a mentor school and granted resources to provide technical assistance and support to another school in the District identified for improvement. c. As appropriate, the District will support a school's application for state and national recognition in the national Blue Ribbon School program. d. The District will collaborate with the community to identify other possible recognitions of the school's progress and achievement. e. Schools will receive a grant to encourage and facilitate further improvement. The amount of the grant will be determined by annual budget appropriations. Awarded funds will be used for innovative programs, to provide additional materials and supplies, to support technology enhancements, to improve meaningful parent involvement, and/or for professional development of the staff. f. Each school will receive a banner/f lag that celebrates its success. 10Rewards for Staff and Students Each Quality and each Improving School is encouraged to design, in collaboration with parents and the community, celebrations of success and recognition for contributing teachers, teacher teams, other staff, and parent/community volunteers, as well as students who meet the performance goals. 11Sanctions According to ADE and the State Board of Education, sanctions in the ACTAAP system are applied for the purpose of improving teaching and learning, not for punishing schools or the people in them. The LRSD supports this view. Each LRSD school is expected to achieve annually a minimum percentage of its total possible points assigned for the performance indicators in the ACTAAP system for accountability. Failure to do so will result in the following designations: First year: Second year: Third year: Fourth year: Fifth year: Sixth year: High Priority Status Alert Status Low Performing Status Academic Distress Phase I Status Academic Distress Phase II Status Academic Distress Phase III Status To be eligible for removal of any santion designation, leading up to, but not including. Academic Distress Phase I, a school must attain the minimum percentage of its total possible points for two consecutive years. Once classified as Academic Distress Phase I, a school must comply with the rules and regulations to be promulgated by the ADE in order to be removed from this category. Failure to do so will result in the designationof Academic Distress Phase II, and so forth. The District will not identify schools for sanctions. Rather, the District will ensure the following levels of technical assistance and/or corrective actions for schools identifed for improvement by the State. In other words, the District will form a partnership with each school in need of improvement and will assist and support that school in its improvement efforts. To that end, the District has reorganized staff in the Division of Instruction to form a multi-disciplinary School Improvement department composed of four teams: (a) Testing and Program Evaluation\n(b) Professional Development\n(c) Technical Assistance (COE and Title I)\nand (d) Planning, Development, and Accountability. These teams will be supplemented by three additional teams 12 in the Teaching and Learning department\n(a) Curriculum and Instruction\n(b) Special Programs\n(c) VIPs and Parent Involvement, A common mission for all Division of Instruction teams will be to help schools help students achieve the challenging standards established by the State of Arkansas and the LRSD and as measured by the various performance indicators. The following technical assistance and support services are established for schools requiring improvements: First Year\nHigh Priority Status A school identified by ADE as High Priority Status\" is a school that for two consecutive years has not met the expected improvement goals. The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to\n1. Inform the principal, the central office broker, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation of the school and its implications. 2. Provide appropriate levels of technical assistance to the school as it develops and implements its School Improvement Plan so that it addresses specific elements of student performance problems and includes waivers of any policies or regulations that impede the ability of the school to educate its students. 3. Conduct a School Improvement Audit to determine the extent to which the Campus Leadership Plan is being implemented at the school (meetings conducted, participation of CLT members, quality of the School Improvement Plan, use of disaggregated data for decision-making, action research projects underway, sense of collective responsibility, quality of professional development, etc.). 4. Require that the recommendations from the School Improvement Audit be addressed in the following year's School Improvement Plan, if not immediately. 5. Monitor regularly and conduct formative evaluations of the implementation of the School Improvement Plan, reviewing with the principal and the Campus Leadership Team formative data and making suggestions for modifications and adjustments to the implementation plan. 136. Provide the principal, the broker, members of the Campus Leadership Team, and other appropriate staff opportunities to participate in professional development activities that should lead to school improvement. Year Two: Alert Status A school identifed as \"Alert Status\" is a school that failed to make necessary improvements after identification as \"High Priority Status.\" The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: 1. Inform the principal, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation and its implications. 2. Conduct a comprehensive Curriculum Audit, including interviews with most staff and representative numbers of students and parents. A written report will be compiled by the audit team, approved by the Assistant Superintendent for School Improvement and the Associate Superintendent for Teaching and Learning and provided orally and in writing to the Associate Superintendent for School Operations, the Assistant Superintendent for School Operations, the principal, the broker, and the Campus Leadership Team. Copies will be provided to the Superintendent, the Cabinet, and other appropriate central office staff who need to be involved in the school's improvement efforts. 3. The School Improvement Plan for the following year, if not immediately, must address the recommendations from the Curriculum Audit. 4. Provide appropriate technical assistance as the school develops and implements its School Improvement Plan so that it addresses specific elements of student performance and includes waivers of any policies or regulations that impede the ability of the school to educate its students. At this stage, the District may mandate the implementation of specific actions, professional development, or programs to address needs identified in the Curriculum Audit and/or the analysis of disaggregated student performance data. 5. The District shall take corrective action during the Alert Status year through one or more of the following\na. Decrease the decision-making authority of the Campus Leadership Team\n14b. Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes\nc. Reflect the school's low performance in the evaluation of the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance of the school. Year Three: Low Performing Status A school identified as \"Low Performing Status\" is a school that failed to make necessary improvements after its identification \"Alert Status.\" If a school fails to make acceptable progress within its third year of sanctions, then the District shall apply \u0026lt; or more of the following sanctions: as one a. b. c. d. Revoke the authority of the school to design its School Improvement Plan and budget. Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes. Reflect the low performance of the school in the performance evaluations of responsible staff, including the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance of the school. Conduct follow-up audits to determine the extent to which the school has effectively implemented the recommendations of the School Improvement Audit and the Curriculum Audit conducted in years one and two. Year Four: Academic Distress Phase I Status If a school fails to make acceptable progress within its fourth year, then the District shall apply one or more of the following sanctions: a. Revoke the authority of the school to design its School Improvement Plan and budget. b. Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes. c. Reflect the low performance of the school in the performance evaluations of responsible staff, including the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance of the school. 15d. Conduct follow-up audits to determine the extent to which the school has effectively implemented the recommendations of the School Improvement Audit and the Curriculum Audit conducted in years one and two. Sanctions for Central Office Upon the Superintendent's recommendation, the performance evaluations of central office staff designated to provide leadership in human resources, teaching and learning, school improvement, school operations, administrative services, and technology, including members of the Superintendent's Cabinet, shall also reflect the schoools' low performance if it can be determined that they shared responsibility, through their decisions or actions, or lack thereof, for the low achievement of schools identified for sanctions. School Role When Identified for Sanctions Each school identified for sanctions shall: a. In consultation with central staff and the Campus Leadership Team develop or revise a School Improvement Plan in ways that have the greatest likelihood of improving the performance of all children in meeting the expected improvement goals outlined in ACTAAP and the Quality Index. b. Align all the school's systems and resources behind the effective implementation of the plan. c. Submit the plan in a timely manner to school and District-level staff for review, feedback, and approval. d. Implement the plan, conducting self-monitoring on a frequent basis to determine success and then making appropriate adjustments. e. Consult frequently with District-level staff assigned to support the school and to provide technical assistance. f. Improve the skills of its staff by providing effective professional development activities. At least ten percent of the Title I funds (if received) shall be committed over a two-year period to professional development\nor the school must otherwise demonstrate that it is effectively carrying out professional development activities from other funding sources. Decisions about how to use the professional development funds shall be made 16by teachers, principals, and other school staff in that school during the first year a school is identified for sanctions. 17C\nPage 1 of2 From: To: Date: LESLEY, BONNIE \u0026lt;BALESLE@IRC.LRSD.K12.AR.US\u0026gt; 'asbrown@aristotle.net' \u0026lt;asbrown@aristotle.net\u0026gt; Tuesday, July 13, 1999 2:47 PM Subject: Collective Responsibility Thanks to all of you for your feedback. You'll see much of it incorporated into the attached latest draft. We appreciate the time that everyone took to review this lengthy document. Many of your comments were very helpful and have made it stronger. One problem, it was clear, is that some of you have not seen the state ACTAAP plan, and you wrote all over the state portions without undersanding that we can't change those. The state's indicators were copied verbatum, as were the names of the levels, of sanctions. What we did was take the state system and then build around it our own local indicators and local systems of support, rewards, and sanctions. You may want to review the ACTAAP plan on the ADE web page. It will make our plan much more understandable. There have been multiple revisions to the draft that I gave to you. We received feedback from Dr. Steve Ross, from the Cabinet, from the Supt., and last Thursday from board members, in addition to your comments, so this new draft reflects all those suggestions. You all used the following words to describe our inclusive goals of 100% (some of which are from the state and cannot be changed): \"artificial, \"airheaded,\" \"diminishing the value of honors,\" \"not realistic,\" \"incongruous,\" \"premature,\" \"set up for failure,\" \"dream on,\" and so forth. Many of us are very uncomfortable with a goal statement reflecting fewer than 100%, however, for we fear that some will interpret that to mean that II tl tl II we have differentiated expectations for students. We are especially uncomfortable if anyone interprets those differentiated expectations to be racial-for we believe exactly the opposite! We feel strongly that if we do not aim high and inclusively, then we will continue to get the same poor results. We especially believe that high goals are important on CRTs. And we do not want anyone to ask, \"Whose kid are you giving up on?\" ill You will note that the new draft, nevertheless (and against my personal better judgment), changes many of the percentages to reflect those in the Strategic Plan--65% above grade level, for instance, on the SAT9, and 90% mastery of CRTs since one of the goals says 9 of 10 will meet standards. In truth, we are most interested in schools' progress toward meeting the goals, not that all the schools will absolutely perform at the goal level. See what you think. The suggestions that you all made that were the most helpful were as follows: * use a chart to display the actions to be taken each year of sanctions and to assign responsibility for each action. *clarify that the ADE, not the State of Arkansas, has done or will do certain things. define the various kinds of goals earlier in the document-before the tables rather than after them. 7/13/99*be more Page 2 of 2 specific about when sanctions will be applied to central office clarify the definitions of \"Quality Schools\" and \"Improving Schools. Again, thanks to all of you for your help. 1 am attaching a copy of the latest draft--the one that will be presented to the board next week. Collective Responsibility for Student Achievement.doc 7/13/99Collective Responsibility for Student Achievement Definition of Collective Responsibility Collective Responsibility means that all the adults in the District and at each school hold themselves accountable for all the students meeting the challenging behavior and academic content standards and benchmarks and other outcomes established by the Board of Education, by the state for accreditation, by federally funded programs, and by external funders of reform initiatives approved by the Board of Education. District-level staff share with school-level staffs in the collective responsibility for school improvement. This critically important attitude is developed and nurtured through professional learning communities established by the District and each school. In addition, the Superintendent shall ensure that all job descriptions of appropriate District-level and building-level staff\nannual work plans\nDi strict-level processes and school-level parameters for decision-making\npersonnel hiring, assignment, promotion, and evaluation systems\nand the professional development programs are results-based and aligned with the improvement indicators established in the Quality Index. Reporting Responsibilities The Superintendent shall report to the Board of Education annually on progress related to the implementation of the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. In addition, so that the community is also informed on the Districts progress in meeting expected improvement goals, the following reports must be submitted to the Board of Education in open sessions. District Annual Performance Report The Annual Performance Report is to be submitted to the Board of Education no later than August 30 annually. It shall include data relating to each of the Quality Indicators, including the baseline year data so that progress can be identified. The Annual Performance Report shall also include the accreditation status and accountability status for each school, as determined by the Arkansas Department of Education. School Performance Reports The state-mandated School Performance Reports shall be published and distributed to parents and other interested patrons annually. These report cards shall include the data mandated by the Arkansas Department of Education, but also school data relating to the Districts Quality Indicators. School principals shall disseminate these reports to all the staff members and parents in their school community and make them available to interested patrons. At least one parent meeting shall be conducted annually by the Campus Leadership Team and the principal to discuss the 1performance of the school and planned short- and long-range improvements. The District may disseminate school-level supplements to the School Performance Reports to include data relating to District-selected Quality Indicators. Accreditation and Accountability Status If a school has been identified for school improvement, as per Title I regulations and/or if the school is conditionally accredited or nonaccredited, then the designation and an explanation of its implications, as well as the accountability status of the school as defined by the State shall be included in the School Performance Report. Program Evaluations The results of any internal program evaluation studies or evaluations of grant-funded projects are to be provided to the Board of Education within a month of their submission to the Superintendent and/or to the funding organization. School Improvement Plans Although there are multiple state and local indicators, Campus Leadership Teams should select, based on their data analysis, three to five priority improvement goals as a focus for the School Improvement Plan. (See the Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Planning process.) 2State Quality IndicatorsTier I The Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) establishes the following indicators based on performance goals for Tier I: State Indicator Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests Goal (Definition)______________ 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy. Grade Level(s) Grades 4, 6, 8 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics. Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Algebra I. Secondary 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. School Drop Out Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development School Safety 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Literacy. At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12* grade._________________ Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%.________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher._______________________ 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually.__________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Grades 7-12 Grades K-12 Grades K-12 Grades K-12 Grades K-12 3State Quality Indicators^Tier II The Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) establishes the following indicators for Tier II. Tier II indicators are based on trend and improvement goals. Trend goals will be established for different cohorts of students, and improvement goals will be established for the same cohort of students over time. State Indicator Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests Goal (Distlrtition)______________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion- referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Literacy will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Grade Level(s) Grades 4, 6, and 8 Secondary 4Tier 11School Selected Indicators (Schools Select Any 5) State indicator Drop-outs Average Daily Attendance_________ Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development School Safety Other School Selected Indicators Goal (Definition)_______________ Secondary schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12* grade. Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate.____________ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher._______________ Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts._______ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Grade Levet(s) Secondary All levels All levels All levels All levels All levels 5Additional District-Selected Indicators The following additional academic indicators (based also on both performance and trend/improvement) have been established by the Little Rock School District. Value-Added Goals or Improvement Goals The District-adopted criterion-referenced tests for grades K-11 will be administered to provide pre- and post-test scores so that gains of individual students may be measured each semester. Only those scores of students who were in the school the previous test administration will be used in calculating value-added gains (or improvement). The purpose of this measure is to be able to determine the extent to which a school adds value through individual students gains. In other words, regardless of whether students attain the proficient level at any given grade, the District is interested in whether the students progressed toward proficiency during that year. Both trend and improvement data will be tracked as well. LRSD indicator Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test Goal (Definition)______________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. Grade Level(s) Kindergarten Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pretest to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a school's students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. Grade 1 The percent of grade 1 students demonstrating gains from the pretest to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. i 6LRSD Indicator Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Test Goal (Definition) 65% of a schools students in every Grade Level(s) Grades 5, 7, 10 sub-group of race and gender shall ,th perform at or above the 50 percentile in reading. The percent of students in every sub-group or race and gender performing at or above the 50^ percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50'^ percentile in mathematics. Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Test The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50'^ percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 7LRSD Indicator Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Test Goal (Definition) _____________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. Grade Level(s) Performance on District-Adopted Criterion-Referenced Tests The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pretest to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Grades 2-11 8LRSD indicator Gc^l (Definition) ___________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester. Grade liMt(s) Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Enrollment in Algebra I by grade 8 Honors Seal on High School Diploma The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in mathematics each quarter will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pretest to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________ 65% of middle and high school students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year. The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high schools students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas. The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Grades 6-12 Grade 8 Grades 9-12 9IZRSD Indicator Taking the ACT Gd^i (Deflhitlon)_______________ 65% of a high schools students will take the ACT. Grade Level(s) Grades 11-12 Performance on the ACT The percent of students taking the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year.________________ 90% of a high schools students who take the ACT will earn a score of at least 19. Grades 11-12 Taking Advanced Placement Examinations The percent of students earning a score of 19 or above will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high schools graduates will have taken at least one AP examination. Grades 11-12 Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations The percent of students taking at least one AP examination will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a high schools students taking AP examinations will score a 3 or above. Grades 11-12 Completion of Graduation Requirements The percent of students earning a score of 3 or above on AP examinations will meet or exceed the trend goal each year._________ 100% of a high schools seniors will complete all the graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony, The percent of seniors meeting all graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Grade 12 A schools performance on these District-selected indicators may be reflected in a local supplement to the state-mandated School Performance Report or as a part of the narrative in the Tier III report that becomes a part of the states School Performance Report. 10Indicators by School Level On the following pages are lists of the state and district indicators by school level. These indicators include the priorities established in the LRSD Strategic Plan, the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, the National Science Foundation Project, Title I, ACTAAP, and ACSIP. Also included in the tables are the columns of data that will be used to determine a schools status. 11Quality Indicators for Elementary Schools Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1990-00 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 4 4 K-5 K-5 K-5 K-5 4 4 State Indicators - Tier I - Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Literacy T est Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development School Safety Pedormance on State- Mandated Criterion Referenced Grade 4 Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test Goal (Definition) 100% of a school's students shall periorm at or above the proficient\" level in reading and writing literacy. 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in mathematics. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%._________________________________ 100% of a school's classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a school's certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your\nScoire 12Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 K-5 School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Average Daily Attendance Goal (Deiinltion\u0026gt; ' Your Results Growth Goat Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 K-5 1999-00 K-5 Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 1999-00 K-5 School Safety 1999-00 K-5 Other School Selected Indicators Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. LRSD Elementary School Quality Indicators Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy T est 90% of a school's kindergarten students shall perform at or atxive the proficient level in literacy. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 1999-00 1 Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test The percent of kindergarten students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a school's grade 1 students shall perform at or above the \"proficient level in literacy. 13Bas^ine Year 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 LRSD Indicators Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Goal (Definition) The percent of grade 1 students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a school's students in every subgroup of race and gender will perform at or above the 50'\" percentile in reading. The percent of a school's students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50'\" percentile will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a school's students will perform atxjve the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a school's students shall perform al or above the 50'\" percentile in grade 5 mathematics. Your Results Growth: Goat Your , Growth Your Score 14Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 5 5 5 5 5 2-5 2-5 2-5 LRSD Indicators Goat {Definition} Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Readinq Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test The percent of students performing at or above the SO' percentile in grade 5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement qoals each year. 90% of a school's students shall perform at or above the \"proficient level in grades 2-5 reading each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the \"proficient\" level in grades 2-5 reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement qoals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth ,Your Score 15Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) 1999-00 2-5 1999-00 2-5 1999-00 2-5 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test 90% of a school's students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in grades 2-5 mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the \"proficient\" level in grades 2-5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 mathematics pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 16Quality Indicators for Middle Schools Baseline Year Grade teweis 2001-02 6 1999-00 8 2001-02 6 1999-00 8 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) 1999-00 7-8 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test School Dropout Goal (Definition) 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in grade 6 reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in grade 8 reading and writing literacy. 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in grade 6 mathematics. 100% of a school's students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in grade 8 mathematics. 100% of a school's grade 7 or 8 students who complete Algebra I shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level. 100% of a school's grade 8 students who complete Geometry shall perform at or above the proficient\" level. 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12' grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%. 100% of a school's classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Your Results Growth Goal Your GrciWttt your 17Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 6-8 State Indicators Tier I Professional Development Goal (Definition) 1999-00 6-8 School Safety 100% of a school's certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Basetine. Year Grade Levels 2001-02 6 State-Mandated Indicators .Si\n, Tier II ' Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. Goal (Definition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. 2001-02 6 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 18Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) State-Mandated Indicators Tier II Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. Goal (Deflnlllon) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Baseline Year Grade Levels 1999-00 e-8 SchodhSeteMd Indicators Tier tl (Select five,) Drop-outs 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development 1999-00 6-8 School Safety 6-8 Other School Selected Indicators The percent of students completing Algebra I performing at or above the proficient\" level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students completing Geometry performing at or above the proficient\" level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Goal (Oalinition) Secondary schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12'\" grade. Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 19LRSD Middle School Quality Indicators Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 LRSD Indicators Goal (Deiinition) Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test 65% of a school's students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50'\" percentile in reading. The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50'\" percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a school's students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50'\" percentile in mathematics. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 20Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 7 7 7 7 1 6-8 6-8 6-8 LRSD Indicators Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test Goal (Definition) The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the so'\" percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a school's students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in reading each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Your, Results Growth, Goat Your Growth Your Score 21Baseline: Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 LRSD Indicators Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________________ Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 Goal {Definition) 90% of a school's students shall perform at or above the \"proficient\" level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester._____ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________ 65% of a middle school's students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course each year. The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a middle school's students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 22Quality Indicators for High Schools Baseline Year 2001-02 2001-02 2001-02 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade levela 9-12 9-12 11 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 State Indicators TIeri Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test_______________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test_______________ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test_______________ School Drop Out Average Daily Attendance_________ Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development School Safety Goal (Definition) 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Algebra I. 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. 100% of a high school's students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in Reading and Writing Literacy. At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12'\" grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%._________________________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and I violent acts. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Sodre 23Baseline Year Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 11 State-Mandated indicators Tier 11 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test Goal (Oellnition) The percent of students performing at or above the \"proficient level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in Literacy will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Baseline Year , Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 SchookSetected indicators Tier II (Select live.) Drop-outs Goal (Definition) 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development High schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12\" grade. Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. Your Results Your Results Growth Goal Growth Goal Your Growth Your Growth Your Score Your Score 24Baseline Year, , Grade Levels 2001-02 9-12 9-12 School-Selected Indicatora Tier II (Set^ live.) School Safety Goal {Deiinition) Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Other School Selected Indicators Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. LRSD High School Quality Indicators Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition) 1998-99 10 1998-99 10 Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test 65% of a school's students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50\" percentile in reading. The percent of students performing at or above the 50 percentile in reading will meet 1998-99 10 1998-99 10 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. 1998-99 10 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a school's students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. Your Results Growth Goat Your Grdvrth Your Score 25Baseline. Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 Grade Levels 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9-11 LRSD Indicators Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Goal {Definition) The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a school's students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50'\" percentile in mathematics. The percent of students performing at or above the 50'\" percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a school's students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a school's students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a school's student's will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a school's students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a school's students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in reading each semester. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 26Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 2002-03 2002-03 Grade Levels 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-12 9-12 12 12 LRSD Indicators Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________________ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test_________________ Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Honors Seal on High School Diploma Honors Seal on High School Diploma Goal {Definition) The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in mathematics each semester. 1 The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._________________________ 65% of a high school's students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year._____________________________ The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a high school's students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas._________________________ The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 27Baselirie Year 1998-99 Grade Levels 11-12 LRSD tndioators Goal (Deltnition) Taking the ACT Your Results Growth Goat' Vour Growth 1998-99 1998-99 11-12 11-12 Taking the ACT Performance on the ACT 1998-99 11-12 Performance on the ACT 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 Taking Advanced Placement Examinations Taking Advanced Placement Examinations 1998-99 11-12 1998-99 11-12 Performance on Advanced Piacement Examinations Performance on Advanced Piacement Examinations 65% of a high school's students will take the ACT._________________________________ The percent of students taking the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a high school's students who take the ACT will earn a score of at least 19. The percent of students earning a score of 19 or above on the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high school's graduates will take at least one AP examination. The percent of students taking at least one AP examination will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a high school's students taking AP examinations will score a \"3\" or above. Your Score 1998-99 12 Completion of Graduation Requirements 1998-99 12 Completion of Graduation Requirements The percent of a high schools students earning a score of 3\" or above on AP examinations will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 100% of a high school's seniors will complete all the graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony. The percent of seniors meeting all graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 28Rewards for Schools The District shall develop a system to reward (a) Quality Schools: schools absolutely meeting all the performance indicators established by the Arkansas Department of Education and (b) Improving Schools: schools demonstrating improvement: meeting a preponderance of the trend and/or improvement goals established by the Arkansas Department of Education and LRSD. The following points are established for each indicator. They will be added to determine a schools total score. 0 1 2 3 Declined in performance from previous year or semester Maintained last years performance and/or improved but did not meet trend/improvement goal Met trend/improvement goal Exceeded trend/improvement goal A definition of preponderance and the number of minimum points required for rewards will be established. Quality Schools and Improvina Schools Quality Schools and Improving Schools may be recognized and rewarded in the following ways, as determined by the Superintendent: a. b. c. d. e. f. A presentation will be made to the Board of Education on the schools achievements involving both staff and parents, a press release commending the schools performance will be issued, and schools will be featured in District publications, on cable television, and on the web page. The school may be designated as a mentor school and granted resources to provide technical assistance and support to another school in the District identified for improvement. As appropriate, the District will support a schools application for state and national recognition in the national Blue Ribbon School program. The District will collaborate with the community to identify other possible recognitions of the schools progress and achievement. Schools will receive a grant to encourage and facilitate further improvement. The amount of the grant will be determined by annual budget appropriations. Awarded funds will be used for innovative programs, to provide additional materials and supplies, to support technology enhancements, to improve meaningful parent involvement, and/or for professional development of the staff. Each school will receive a banner/flag that celebrates its success. Rewards for Staff and Students Each Quality and each Improving School is encouraged to design, in collaboration with parents and the community, celebrations of success and recognition for contributing teachers, teacher teams, other staff, and 29 parent/community volunteers, as well as students who meet the performance goals. Sanctions According to ADE and the State Board of Education, sanctions in the ACTAAP system are applied for the purpose of improving teaching and learning, not for punishing schools or the people in them. The LRSD supports this view. Each Arkansas school is expected to achieve annually a minimum percentage of its total possible points assigned for the performance indicators in the ACTAAP system for accountability. Failure to do so will result in the following designations, as determined by the Arkansas Department of Education: First year: Second year: Third year: Fourth year: Fifth year: Sixth year: High Priority Status Alert Status Low Performing Status Academic Distress Phase I Status Academic Distress Phase II Status Academic Distress Phase III Status To be eligible for removal of any sanction designation, leading up to, but not including. Academic Distress Phase I, a school must attain the minimum percentage of its total possible points for two consecutive years. Once classified as Academic Distress Phase 1, a school must comply with the rules and regulations to be promulgated by the ADE in order to be removed from this category. Failure to do so will result in the designation of Academic Distress Phase II, and so forth. The District will not identify schools for sanctions. Rather, the District will ensure the following levels of technical assistance and/or corrective actions for schools identifed for improvement by the Arkansas Department of Education. In other words, the District will form a partnership with each school in need of improvement and will assist and support that school in its improvement efforts. To that end, the District has reorganized staff in the Division of Instruction to form a multi-disciplinary School Improvement department. A common mission for all Division of Instruction teams will be to help schools help students achieve the challenging standards established by the Arkansas Department of Education and the LRSD and as measured by the various performance, trend, and improvement indicators. The assignment of a Broker for each school is another level of support. The following technical assistance and support services are established for schools requiring improvements: 30Technical Assistance and Support for Schools Identified for Improvement Year/Status/ Definition Year One: Warned LRSD Assistance/Support Assigned Responsibility The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: 1. The first year that an LRSD school fails to meet its performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 2. 3. 4. 5. Inform the principal, the central office broker, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation of the school and its implications. Provide appropriate levels of technical assistance to the school as it develops and implements its School Improvement Plan so that it addresses specific elements of student performance problems and includes waivers of any policies or regulations that impede the ability of the school to education its students. Conduct a School Improvement Audit to determine the extent to which the Campus Leadership Plan is being implemented at the school. Require the recommendations from the School Improvement Audit to be addressed in the following years School Improvement Plan, if not possible to do so immediately. Monitor regularly and conduct formative evaluations of the implementation of the School Improvement Plan, reviewing with the principal and the Campus Leadership Team formative data and making suggestions for modifications and adjustments to the implementation plan. Testing and Program Evaluation Team Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Technical Assistance Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Associate Superintendent for School Services 31Year\nStatus/ Detlnttion LRSD Assistance/Support 6. Provide the principal, the broker, members of the Campus Leadership Team, and other appropriate staff opportunities to participate in professional development activities that should lead to school improvement. Assigned Responsibliity Professional Development Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team\nAssociate Superintendent for School Services 32Year/Status/ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support Assigned Responsibiiity Year Two: High Priority Status The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: 1. A school identified by ADE that for two consecutive years fails to meet the performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 2. 3. 4. Inform the principal, the central office broker, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation of the school and its implications. Provide appropriate levels of technical assistance to the school as it develops and implements its School Improvement Plan so that it addresses specific elements of student performance problems and includes waives of any policies or regulations that impede the ability of the school to educate its students. Conduct a comprehensive Curriculum Audit to determine the extent to which the school is implementing the District curriculum and the quality of its interventions for students not meeting the standards. Require that the recommendations from the Curriculum Audit be addressed in the following years School Improvement Plan, if impossible to do so immediately. Possibly mandate the implementation of specific actions, professional development, or programs to address needs identified in the Curriculum Audit and/or the analysis of disaggregated student performance data. 5. The District shall take corrective action during the High Priority Status Year through one or more of the following: Testing and Program Evaluation Team Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Curriculum/ Instruction Team\nPlanning and Development Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Associate Superintendent for School Services 33Year/StatusZ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support (a) Decrease the decision making authority of the Campus Leadership Team, (b) Require participation in remedial training or professional development, and then implementating the necessary changes, (c) Reflect the schools low performance in the evaluation of the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance of the school, (d) Replace the school principal. Assigned Responsibility 34Year/Status/ Definition Year Three: Alert Status LRSD Assistance/Support The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: 1. Assigned Responsibility A school identified by ADE that for three consecutive years fails to meet the performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. Inform the principal, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation and its implications. Testing and Program Evaluation Team 2. Conduct follow-up or monitoring of implementation of School Improvement and Curriculum Audit recommendations. Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team 3. Mandate appropriate specific actions, professional development, and/or programs to address student needs. Associate Superintendent for School Services 4. Continue to provide appropriate technical assistance as the school develops and implements its School Improvement Plan. 5. The District shall take corrective action during the Alert Status Year through one or more of the following: (a) Decrease the decision-making authority of the Campus Leadership Team\n(b) Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes\n(c) Reflect the schools low performance in the evaluation of the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance of the school. Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services 35Year/StatusZ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support (d) Reconstitute the school staff by replacing the principal and up to 50 percent of the teachers and other staff, as appropriate. Assigned Responsibility Year/Status/ Definition Year Four: Low Performing Status LRSD Assistance/Support The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to apply one or more of the following sanctions: 1. Assigned Responsibility A school identified by ADE that for four consecutive years fails to meet its performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. Revoke the authority of the school to design its School Improvement Plan. Associate Superintendent for School Services 2. 3. Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes. Reflect the low performance of the school in the performance evaluations of responsible staff, including the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance. 4. Conduct follow-up audits to determine the extent to which the school has effectively implemented the recommendations of the School Improvement Audit and the Curriculum Audit conducted in years one and two. 5. Reconstitute the school staff by replacing the principal and up to 50 percent of the teachers and other staff, as appropriate. Associate Superintendent for School Services Associate Superintendent for School Services Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services 36Year/Status/ Definition Year Five: Academic Distress Phase I Status LRSD Assistance/Support The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to apply one or more of the following sanctions: 1. Assigned Responsibility A school identified by ADE that for five consecutive years fails to meet its performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 2. 3. 4. 5. Revoke the authority of the school to design its School Improvement Plan. Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes. Reflect the low performance of the school in the performance evaluations of responsible staff, including the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance. Conduct follow-up audits to determine the extent to which the school has effectively implemented the recommendations of the School Improvement Audit and the Curriculum Audit conducted in years one and two. Reconstitute the school staff by replacing the principal and up to 50 percent of the teachers and other staff, as appropriate. Associate Superintendent for School Services Associate Superintendent for School Services Associate Superintendent for School Services Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Sanctions for Central Office Effective Year Two, upon the Superintendents recommendation, the performance evaluations of central office staff designated to provide leadership in human resources, teaching and learning, school improvement, school operations, administrative services, and technology, including members of the Superintendents Cabinet, shall also reflect the schoools low performance if it can be determined that they shared responsibility, through their decisions or actions, or lack thereof, for the low achievement of schools identified for sanctions. Sanctions for the Superintendent will be determined by the Board of Education. 37I School Role When Identified for Sanctions Each school identified for sanctions shall: a. In consultation with central staff and the Campus Leadership Team develop or revise a School Improvement Plan in ways that have the greatest likelihood of improving the performance of all children in meeting the expected improvement goals outlined in ACTAAP and the b. c. d. e. f. Quality Index. Align all the schools systems and resources behind the effective implementation of the plan. Submit the plan in a timely manner to school and District-level staff for review, feedback, and approval. Implement the plan, conducting self-monitoring on a frequent basis to determine success and then making appropriate adjustments. Consult frequently with District-level staff assigned to support the school and to provide technical assistance. Improve the skills of its staff by providing effective professional development activities. At least ten percent of the Title I funds (if received) shall be committed over a two-year period to professional development\nor the school must otherwise demonstrate that it is effectively carrying out professional development activities from other funding sources. Decisions about how to use the professional development funds shall be made by teachers, principals, and other school staff in that school during the first year a school is identified for sanctions. Definitions School Improvement AuditThis audit will include a review of the meeting minutes of the Campus Leadership Team, the participation level of CLT members, quality of the School Improvement Plan, use of disaggregated data for decision-making, action research projects underway, sense of collective responsibility, quality of professional development, etc. If the school receives Title I funds, the audit will include determinations of the extent to which the school is in compliance with federal regulations and expectations. The audit team will be composed of staff from both the central office and campus levels. A written report will be compiled by the audit team and then approved by the Assistant Superintendent for School Improvement and the Associate Superintendent for School Services. It shall be provided orally and in writing to the Assistant Superintendent for School Services, the principal, the broker, and the Campus Leadership Team. Copies will be provided to the Superintendent, the Cabinet, and other appropriate central office staff who need to be involved in the schools improvement efforts. 385013744187 UlfiLKER LAW FIRM 528 P02/02 JUL 21 99 11:35 John W. Walker, P.A. attorney Ai Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 R4X (601) 374-4187 JOHN W WALKER RALPH Washington MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. Via Facsimile - 324*2146 July 21. 1999 Dr. Leslie Camine Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr, Camine\nPlease reserve a space on tomorrows agenda before the Board for us to have a discussion about the subject of remediation of achievement disparities and about the Hall High School situation of last year. We have arrived at the tentative conclusion that Dr. Bonnie Lesleys approach to remediation has been ineffective and, with the line-up that she, with your approval, has in mind for implementing new policies is doomed to repeat past failures. We have further tentatively concluded that people like Ms. Gayle Bradford, as we have noted to you repeatedly, appear to be favored in face of if not because of, their treatment, mistreatment, or omissive treatment (newly created word by me) of African American people. As I have reminded you, when Ms. Bradford was at Cloverdale she sent black students on scores of occasions home without behavior documents. There were other complaints from her staff of a racial nature. She was promoted. Now the same scenario has repeated itself at Hall High School. She has been promoted again to be your special assistant. Something is remiss here and I bdievc that the Board should be made aware of it from my perspective as counsel for the Joshua Intervenors. You may share this letter with the Board members, Dr. Lesley and Ms. Bradford. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, / 1 John W. Walker JWW\njs CC-. Mr. Chris Heller Ms. Ann Brown NOV 17 1999/^ Si- CfflCEOF \\ DESEGHEGATiONMOSITORIi The Little Rock School District Board of Education invites you to attend A Status Report: Student Achievement in Little Rock and a Design for Improved Performance. The program will be held at the Statehouse Conference Center in the back of the Excelsior. A question and answer session will follow the presentation. Monday, Nov. 22, 1999 6:30 p.m. RECEIVED i STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT AUG - 4 2004 Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Examination OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelsStudents Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 Target Score - 40.16 School 1998- 99 1999- 00 2000- 01 2001- 02 2002 -03 2003- 04 Change State of Arkansas LRSD Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright______ Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson King__________ Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell_______ Rockefeller Romine Stephens_______ Terry__________ Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff 34 22 16 11 24 6 32 10 4 19 10 52 2 29 12 49 63 31 0 23 0 4 17 35 12 36 35 4 34 6 22 6 7 48 6 12 41 30 11 12 29 22 54 6 10 27 0 55 10 42 7 49 55 30 22 43 28 9 57 44 41 34 32 0 38 3 28 8 25 45 16 24 48 30 30 35 37 14 44 11 11 10 18 57 24 53 12 46 64 37 20 46 9 6 39 42 30 32 28 0 48 9 24 9 16 52 6 21 55 38 38 50 49 12 64 26 20 28 32 65 22 66 17 48 68 41 15 53 21 20 38 69 27 45 21 17 41 21 34 17 33 66 15 24 76 49 27 40 51 27 48 19 60 60 33 71 23 59 54 77 69 54 47 78 51 17 47 69 43 37 52 17 67 38 45 19 39 75 33 30 71 54 41 78 59 16 71 57 76 58 42 73 23 72 52 79 83 54 45 63 42 19 58 78 35 43 58 24 74 59 45 23 38 67 33 29 +37 +32 +25 +67 +35 +10 +39 +47 +72 +39 +32 +21 +21 +43 +40 +30 +20 +23 +45 +40 +42 +15 +41 +43 +23 +7 +23 +20 +40 +53 +23 +17 +31 +19 +27 +17Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelsBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 Target Score - 40.16 School 1998- 99 1999- 00 2000- 01 Arkansas LRSD Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson King________ Mabelvale McDemott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell_____ Rockefeller Romine Stephens_____ Terry________ Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff 9 8 15 13 2 0 16 4 4 13 0 18 2 9 13 6 30 12 0 11 0 4 0 11 12 25 18 0 9 0 4 6 3 33 7 4 14 15 4 11 18 15 31 0 11 23 0 18 8 25 8 15 21 13 16 32 11 10 21 17 41 25 16 0 15 3 13 8 19 29 14 20 18 16 22 32 23 12 22 12 10 6 7 20 22 10 8 15 26 20 18 20 9 6 23 27 30 4 27 0 25 9 11 9 12 36 0 19 IM 24 24 30 45 31 13 49 24 24 22 25 27 22 40 14 26 35 21 4 40 19 22 18 30 27 22 12 15 24 21 23 14 18 51 12 18 1- 2002- 03 2003- 04 Change 38 35 29 31 30 21 26 14 45 45 28 33 23 35 47 50 42 45 45 68 45 14 31 42 44 23 44 14 50 36 27 19 34 66 31 29 43 43 29 76 46 6 51 50 75 61 30 50 23 63 52 64 61 36 55 58 36 19 48 59 35 28 52 24 52 59 33 24 33 50 32 29 +34 +35 +14 +63 +44 +6 +41 +46 +71 +48 +30 +32 +21 +54 +39 +58 +31 +24 +55 +47 +36 +15 +48 +48 +13 +3 +34 +24 +43 +59 +29 +18 +30 +17 +25 +25School Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic Level^All Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 1998- 99 1999 -00 2000- 01 2001- 02 2002 -03 2003- 04 Change Arkansas_____ LRSD_______ Bale________ Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright____ Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson_____ King________ Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell_____ Rockefeller Romine Stephens_____ Terry________ Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff 41 59 71 75 57 77 46 76 84 52 65 27 81 53 70 41 26 49 81 48 85 83 67 35 70 40 39 89 46 82 44 87 68 21 69 76 39 55 83 67 49 60 35 89 73 58 93 34 78 34 79 29 31 51 67 43 50 81 32 40 35 46 44 88 35 85 58 83 58 40 71 68 i 33 51 47 45 38 67 38 79 52 76 65 29 64 26 74 29 14 37 66 42 71 74 39 40 50 36 60 91 33 77 57 78 61 30 62 66 26 42 52 41 25 62 24 51 57 43 56 30 52 21 56 33 15 37 79 17 53 67 40 23 48 42 63 63 29 60 49 67 32 14 71 50 17 32 45 34 24 56 38 46 14 33 47 10 37 20 27 13 23 26 32 6 28 57 33 20 32 42 22 69 19 46 32 64 35 11 57 41 16 29 38 11 21 58 14 19 6 23 38 11 60 19 27 13 5 31 30 18 41 66 27 13 43 39 32 59 17 18 29 55 56 15 41 54 -25 -30 -33 -64 -36 -19 -32 -57 -78 -29 -27 -16 -21 -34 -43 -28 -21 -18 -51 -30 -44 -17 -40 -22 -27 -1 -7 -30 -29 -64 -15 -32 -12 -6 -28 -22School Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 1998- 99 1999- 00 2000- 01 2001- 02 2002- 03 2003- 04 Change Arkansas LRSD Bale Baseline Booker______ Brady_______ Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin_____ Fulbright_____ Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson King________ Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell_____ Rockefeller Romine Stephens Terry________ Wakefield Washington Watson Western HiUs Williams Wilson Woodruff 72 74 70 77 80 88 71 82 83 60 75 55 82 77 70 71 61 74 76 63 89 83 92 58 70 54 50 92 76 91 64 88 79 28 67 81 71 69 88 67 65 65 55 95 71 62 100 63 79 54 83 60 58 68 75 55 64 81 58 63 35 57 58 88 50 87 74 83 61 62 71 69 66 65 52 46 51 71 55 76 55 75 71 60 65 58 75 52 20 54 76 73 69 74 64 56 50 52 64 93 54 79 73 79 73 43 66 77 54 55 58 45 39 68 40 52  54 44 67 73 52 44 61 52 40 55 96 20 56 64 59 60 48 59 72 64 40 59 60 70 39 26 73 57 41 42 43 41 40 59 53 49 15 45 50 25 37 39 33 28 42 37 33 10 32 59 41 37 33 50 31 71 31 50 43 63 39 17 62 42 37 37 39 12 25 61 23 21 6 23 45 25 62 21 29 18 13 42 25 29 46 68 35 25 43 52 36 59 32 19 36 55 61 26 42 54 -35 -37 -31 -65 -55 -27 -48 -61 -77 -37 -30 -30 -20 -56 -41 -53 -48 -32 -51 -34 -43 -15 -57 -33 -27 -2 -14 -33 -44 -72 -28 -33 -18 -2 -25 -27Grade 6 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelAll Students Little Rock School District, 2000-01 through 2003-04 Target Score - 29.42 School 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest XI 10 2 15 8 1 13 22 2 36 16 2 32 20 6 6 29 23 6 40 20 4 35 17 11. 11 35 31 5 47 26 6 30 26 17 10 44 41 17 Change +30 +16 +4 +13 +11 +9 +9 +31 +19 +15 Grade 6 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelBlack Students Little Rock School District, 2000-01 through 2003-04 Target Score - 29.42 School 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 3 2 1 2 5 6 0 1 1 2 11 7 2 13 9 5 3 14 4 5 12 8 3 11 6 7 4 20 10 4 18 15 6 13 19 14 5 32 16 16 Change +15 +13 +5 +11 +14 +8 +5 +31 +14 +14 iGrade 6 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelAll Students Little Rock School District, 2000-01 through 2003-04 School 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 46 66 87 59 63 65 86 48 51 73 32 59 86 36 57 72 71 34 49 77 27 55 77 41 . 54 66 65 31 43 76 Change 20 39 67 32 36 41 59 19 31 41 -26 -27 -20 -27 -27 -24 -27 -29 -20 -32 Grade 6 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelBlack Students Little Rock School District, 2000-01 through 2003-04 School 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 76 79 87 79 82 72 87 65 81 75 64 72 87 50 75 77 77 49 75 77 61 68 80 60 68 72 72 44 67 77 45 49 66 44 43 43 69 25 52 43 Change -31 -30 -21 -35 -39 -29 -18 -40 -29 -32Grade 8 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelAll Students Little Rock School District, 1999-00 through 2003-04 Target Score - 29.42 School 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 16 9 1 14 14 8 5 17 10 1 21 17 2 23 18 10 3 29 32 5 24 15 1  18 22 7 9 18 30 4 26 16 3 23 22 11 2 23 32 2 Change 37 21 3 33 27 11 15 27 41 3 +21 +12 +2 +19 +13 +3 +10 +10 +31 +2 Grade 8 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1999-00 through 2003-04 Target Score - 29.42 School 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 3' 2 0 1 4 4 4 6 3 0 4 4 1 0 6 8 1 11 1 5 4 1 4 1 5 5 5 6 3 5 4 3 5 5 1 0 1 2 3 10 8 4 10 15 8 8 9 13 4 Change +1 +6 +4 +9 +11 +4 +4 +3 +10 +4Grade 8 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelAll Students Little Rock School District, 1999-00 through 2003-04 School 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Maim Pulaski Heights Southwest 37 58 83 55 56 60 60 35 53 80 37 55 77 53 54 57 69 31 42 76 30 51 74- 47 46 60 54 31 32 73 24 44 60 40 36 44 56 27 32 61 23 47 66 34 45 50 55 34 28 71 Change -14 -11 -17 -21 -11 -10 -5 -1 -25 -9 1 Grade 8 Mathematics Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1999-00 through 2003-04 School 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 71 72 86 73 74 67 65 51 68 81 70 72 81 83 70 63 83 46 70 79 62 64 74 72 63 61 59 45 57 74 55 55 62 56 51 50 61 37 56 63 53 59 66 50 55 56 62 53 48 72 Change -18 -13 -20 -23 -19 -11 -3 +2 -20 -9STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelsAll Stndents Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 ! School 1998- 99 1999- 00 2000- 01 2001- 02 2002 -03 2003- 04 Change State of Arkansas LRSD Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright______ Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson Kins__________ Mabelvale McDermott Meadowchff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell_______ Rockefeller Romine Stephens_______ Terry__________ Wakefield Washington_____ Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff 44 32 23 22 39 19 41 11 13 35 20 61 16 38 27 49 69 37 10 30 17 13 32 54 41 54 48 15 41 15 49 11 27 74 19 6 47 42 33 12 35 20 51 11 17 24 21 73 31 68 31 64 71 43 22 57 33 14 51 73 41 60 40 13 59 12 37 30 53 57 26 35 43 35 34 16 44 21 42 6 11 24 35 71 19 74 19 45 95 43 22 47 20 10 43 42 24 45 32 6 49 23 31 8 33 52 24 28 65 50 41 15 62 44 53 35 27 50 37 72 56 79 32 39 86 52 18 78 32 27 56 85 45 56 25 23 73 28 59 13 47 84 11 47 69 64 83 55 71 32 56 39 80 80 60 90 45 82 48 90 80 79 53 92 46 30 59 91 55 68 65 28 82 46 74 33 53 83 54 62 76 68 55 85 78 45 82 62 56 70 50 84 49 79 52 89 92 77 56 71 56 41 81 91 51 55 65 41 88 67 50 36 68 90 65 58 +32 +36 +32 +63 +39 +26 +41 +51 +43 +35 +30 +23 +33 +41 +25 +40 +23 +40 +46 +41 +39 +28 +49 +37 +10 +1 +17 +26 +47 +52 +1 +25 +41 +16 +46 +52 J I !Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelsBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 1998- 99 1999- 00 2000- 01 2001- 02 2002- 03 2003- 04 Change Arkansas LRSD Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright_____ Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson King________ Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell_____ Rockefeller Romine______ Stephens_____ Terry________ Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff 21 20 19 23 18 15 17 9 13 31 6 32 16 11 24 35 38 24 15 16 13 13 13 31 41 46 41 13 21 7 12 12 24 64 21 4 26 30 23 7 22 21 31 10 18 27 20 52 30 42 33 35 42 41 21 51 25 14 26 57 41 46 26 13 50 10 25 31 48 42 29 34 21 23 30 18 40 20 33 9 10 25 29 33 20 53 19 29 93 29 18 19 19 10 23 24 24 36 36 4 32 21 22 7 19 41 21 18 42 39 38 17 46 42 51 33 44 44 25 53 56 68 29 22 70 42 4 72 31 27 36 70 45 52 23 23 60 28 57 9 36 85 12 43 46 53 86 48 63 28 35 39 73 73 57 81 45 71 41 78 71 66 50 90 48 31 51 79 56 59 69 25 72 41 68 31 45 78 50 61 55 60 57 85 76 39 75 56 55 69 40 69 49 75 50 83 83 71 55 62 54 39 75 83 51 48 77 41 76 69 42 35 61 81 64 29 +34 +40 +38 +62 +58 +24 +58 +47 +42 +38 +34 +37 +33 +64 +26 +48 +45 +47 +40 +46 +41 +26 +62 +52 +10 +2 +36 +28 +55 +62 +30 +23 +37 +17 +43 +25Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelStudents Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 1998- 99 1999- 00 2000- 01 2001- 02 2002- 03 2003- 04 Change Arkansas LRSD Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Stephens Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff 26 41 52 53 40 64 24 60 64 30 50 15 63 26 48 22 18 35 60 53 45 52 35 29 34 15 32 62 38 69 43 54 34 3 52 59 20 28 28 42 29 36 24 51 59 33 29 7 42 10 26 5 14 19 53 14 25 53 9 10 12 14 16 53 14 68 30 43 28 11 50 32 22 32 33 45 21 35 21 51 46 48 41 9 40 7 43 12 0 17 44 12 63 52 23 25 44 14 36 74 24 51 26 59 39 13 35 38 11 19 10 41 14 24 14 20 32 29 44 7 10 5 20 10 3 15 44 10 18 33 14 4 24 30 25 35 5 33 13 57 15 0 36 18 7 10 0 6 5 32 7 15 24 20 20 2 11 2 25 0 2 8 16 2 18 33 11 5 8 16 0 20 2 8 4 33 4 0 4 12 6 8 1 0 4 16 4 17 9 4 19 3 5 5 16 0 1 3 1 5 21 13 3 1 19 8 18 24 2 5 5 21 9 1 18 13 -20 -33 -45 -53 -36 -48 -20 -43 -55 -26 -31 -12 -58 -21 -32 -22 -16 -32 -53 -48 -24 -39 -32 -27 -15 -7 -14 -38 -36 -64 -38 -27 -25 -2 -34 -46 1 I ISchool Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 1998- 99 1999- 00 2000- 01 2001- 02 2002- 03 2003- 04 Change Arkansas LRSD_______ Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin_____ Fulbright_____ Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson_____ KJSS________ Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell_____ Rockefeller Romine Stephens_____ Terry________ Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills WiUiams Wilson Woodruff 50 52 52 58 60 70 38 64 65 29 63 27 64 46 49 35 38 53 58 68 45 52 50 47 34 13 41 61 65 73 64 53 37 6 49 64 39 36 27 48 41 32 40 46 57 31 40 15 43 21 28 10 32 27 63 19 32 52 16 17 12 19 21 53 18 67 42 42 29 20 51 34 43 41 37 43 28 37 31 55 49 44 50 20 41 5 47 24 0 23 50 19 63 52 36 35 44 24 36 78 43 52 35 60 50 16 34 45 24 25 13 41 21 23 14 19 31 44 58 20 10 12 21 17 10 21 54 12 22 29 27 10 24 30 28 36 7 33 10 59 18 0 38 14 15 14 0 7 8 38 12 17 25 27 21 6 11 3 28 0 4 13 17 3 19 34 X'] 11 8 18 0 21 3 9 5 34 6 0 4 10 13 11 7 0 1 19 8 18 9 0 25 6 3 0 17 0 4 3 10 10 25 13 5 4 19 10 24 22 4 6 6 21 11 2 18 13 -21 -41 -45 -58 -53 -51 -30 -46 -56 -29 -38 -21 -61 -46 -32 -35 -34 -50 -48 -58 -20 -39 -45 -43 -15 -3 -17 -39 -61 -67 -58 -26 -26 -4__ -31 -51Grade 6 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelsAll Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 2000-01 2001-02 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar________ Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 2002-03 2003-04 20 13 3 20 19 12 2 19 30 2 30 20 6 28 29 9 11 33 24 8 31 22 15 29 25 7 15 34 31 5 47 32 16 37 35 21 16 54 51 12 Change +27 +19 +13 +17 +16 +9 +14 +35 +21 +10 Grade 6 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelsBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale_____ Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 6 5 3 4 5 1 2 12 7 2 11 10 5 14 20 9 7 22 2 6 14 13 12 14 16 1 11 24 16 6 22 22 17 23 29 19 12 43 23 12 Change +16 +17 +14 +19 +24 +12 +10 +31 +16 +10Grade 6 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelAll Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 35 55 76 46 50 52 74 35 41 72 21 41 63 30 34 45 44 25 31 54 16 28 34 21 25 31 43 13 25 40 12 26 44 18 19 26 32 12 19 43 Change -23 -29 -32 -28 -31 -26 -42 -23 -22 -29 Grade 6 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 63 67 76 63 68 58 77 46 66 72 44 51 67 41 45 49 51 39 50 77 33 35 35 31 30 36 48 18 37 43 Change 29 33 46 23 22 28 40 18 32 43 -34 -34 -30 -40 -46 -30 -37 -28 -34 -29Grade 8 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelsAll Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale_____ Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 24 15 8 9 17 11 8 29 19 9 37 31 9 32 48 19 29 44 45 12 37 30 22 26 48 13 21 41 46 13 48 39 31 42 44 30 25 55 53 15 Chanse 60 46 26 46 55 42 36 65 67 16 +36 +31 +18 +37 +38 +31 +28 +36 +48 +7 Grade 8 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Proficient/Advanced LevelsBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale_____ Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 2003-04 9 8 8 4 8 7 9 15 11 8 21 20 9 13 36 12 18 27 19 12 16 21 22 11 35 13 21 30 22 13 25 28 31 24 29 28 24 46 26 12 33 35 26 28 46 42 32 51 43 17 Change +24 +27 +18 +24 +38 +35 +23 +36 +32 +9 Grade 8 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelAll Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State of Arkansas LRSD_________ Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson_____ Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 31 46 63 55 43 47 57 23 37 54 22 33 51 31 25 32 31 17 27 53 17 29 30 34 22 41 30 13 18 49 12 23 31 22 20 24 24 12 17 35 7 13 31 9 12 9 10 3 8 26 Change -24 -33 -32 -46 -31 -38 -47 -20 -29 -28Grade 8 Literacy Benchmark Examination Percent Performing at Below Basic LevelBlack Students Little Rock School District, 1998-99 through 2003-04 School 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 State of Arkansas LRSD Cloverdale_____ Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale______ Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest 2003-04 56 56 65 66 55 53 60 36 48 55 43 43 54 43 29 39 38 25 44 56 36 36 31 48 30 42 37 17 30' 48 29 28 30 34 27 27 24 15 32 35 18 17 31 14 15 10 10 4 14 26 Change -38 -39 -34 -52 -40 -43 -50 -32 -34 -29LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT END-OF-COURSE ALGEBRA 1 2000-01 TO 2003-04 Algebra 1 End-of-Course General Population Percent Proficient and Advanced ___ AYP = 25.34 State District Central Hall Fair McClellan Parkview Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Hghts Henderson Mabelvale Maim______ Pul Hghts Southwest ueJ 21 14 1 3______ 1 0 7 5 52 65 43 4 40_____ 77 No Class 39 21 11 9 3 4 14 1 61 68 49 32 49 77 32 47 30 13 32 5 6 17 21 87 79 25 19 72 87 33 56 33 23 25 7 8 31 19 89 97 23 42 73 92 53 +35 +19 +22 +22 +6 +8 +24 +14 +37 +32 -20 +38 +33 +15 +21 Algebra 1 End-of-Course Afidcan American Students Percent Proficient and Advanced AYP = 25.34 F\" State District Central Hall Fair McClellan Parkview Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Hghts Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pul Hghts Southwest 4 2 0 0 0 0 1 3_______ 0 64 40_____ 0 9 60 No Class 13 11 7 6 1 4 12 2 40 51 54 17 40 75 29 1|I4'VVW 19 16 1 27 2 6 6 20 50 64 27 0 60 77 23 24 17 13 19 6 7 21 17 77 91 21 16 55 77 50 jti +20 +15 +13 +19 +6 +7 +20 +14 +77 +27 -19 +16 +46 +17 +21Algebra 1 End-of-Course General Population Percent Below Basic State District Central Hall JAFair McClellan Parkview Cloverdale Dunbar For Hghts Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pul Hghts Southwest 29 55 66_____ 71 83 90 44 39_____ 3_______ 3 0 36 3 1 No Class 18 40 50 48 71 67 29 41 5 0 10 10 3 0 14 12 29 40 22 59 58 17 13 0 2 11 14 1 0 20 12 30 33 29 56 47 25 16 3 0 9 15 3 0 18 Algebra 1 End-of-Course Afiican American Students Percent Below Basic State District Central Hall JA Fair McClellan Parkview Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Hghts Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pul Hghts Southwest OOE 58 72 77 77 87 90 50 38 0 0 0 63 5 0 No Class Wil 42 49 56 52 72 66 32 41 0 0 14 11 6 0 14 29 39 48 23 64 57 25 11 0 0 8 0 2 0 23 33 39 41 32 59 47 32 17 8 0 12 21 6 0 19 -17 -25 -33 -42 -27 -43 -19 -23 -0 -3 +9 -21 -0 -1 +4 ii.*' -25 -33 -36 -45 -28 -43 -18 -21 +8 0 +12 -42 +1 0 +5LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT END-OF-COURSE GEOMETRY 2000-01 TO 2003-04 Geometry End-of-Course General Population Percent Proficient and Advanced ___________________________AYP = 25.34 SchoaE State District Central Hall JA Fair McClellan Parkview ZUIIU-Q1 20 13 26 3 2 2 17 2001-02 33 17 27 20 2 3 23 41 39 67 32 24 3 26 50 33 52 19 13 5 46 -1-30 -F20 +26 +16 +11 +3 +29 Geometry End-of-Course African American Students Percent Proficient and Advanced _ AYP = 25.34 PSW State District Central Hall JA Fair McClellan Parkview 1^^ ig20C^2 3 3 5 2 1 2 17 8 6 6 11 1 3 23 2pO24agK 11 17 27 24 23 0 26 rS5Sj(*t^ 15 15 21 12 8 5 30 rfr i Geometry End-of-Course General Population Percent Below Basic State District Central Hall JAFair McClellan Parkview 33 55 37 71 77 75 34 J. 26 52 42 41 74 78 36 15 17 8 17 13 42 19 Tl i 0 11 25 15 31 40 45 11 Geometry End-of-Course African American Percent Below Basic 'SchooL State District Central Hall JA Fair McClellan Parkview 69 72 63 81 82 77 51 58 66 65 50 78 50 2002-03- 41 28 23 27 19 12 29 33 36 31 37 42 47 13 +12 +12 +16 +10 +7 -3 +13 -22 -30 -22 -40 -37 -30 -23  J f -36 -36 -32 -44 -40 -30 -38 JELEVENTH GRADE END-OF-LITERACY RESULTS 2000-01 TO 2003-04 11* Grade Literacy General Population Percent Proficient and Advanced _________________________ AYP = 32.92 State District Central Hall JA Fair McClellan Parkview 24 17 23 14 6 8 23 4.2001-02 -------- 43 32 46 22 22 12 38  47 36 49 32 17 16 53  51 42 60 27 18 19 57 +27 +25 +37 +13 +12 +11 +34 11* Grade Literacy African American Students Percent Proficient and Advanced - AYP = 32.92 I* T State District Central Hall JAFair McClellan Parkview 6 7 9 9 4 7 9 17 17 18 16 16 12 24 19 20 19 21 14 15 35 21 23 26 19 13 18 42 Jhahge' . +15 +16 +17 +10 +9 +11 +33 th 11 Grade Literacy General Population Percent Below Basic ^7 SST5 State District Central Hall JA Fair McClellan Parkview 25 39 40 41 45 47 25 14 24 18 32 34 35 12 10 23 15 19 44 31 12 11*** Grade Literacy African American Percent Below Basic I^scIitoI^:^*^ State_____ District Central Hall JA Fair McClellan Parkview 49 48 52 50 48 49 35 \u0026gt;L\nr'7i ^2001=02^' 33 32 31 34 38 36 15 3T T\n2i2?0S3'*: 28 29 24 23 48 31 18 8 16 9 26 31 26 4 1'2003:04\" 21 22 14 26 35 27 5 JL -17 -23 -31 -15 -14 -21 -21 33 -28 -26 -38 -24 -13 -22 -30FRIDAY, JULY 9. 1999  LR board studies ways to measure school performance BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DE.MOfRAT-GAZETTE Little Rock School Board members got their first look Thursday at proposed student achievement goals by which the state could evaluate schools and ultimately reward or penalize them. \"rhe board reviewed the propousedu adccccoouunntiaaboiuliittyy system aatt a lengthy agenda meeting where it also reviewed for the first time plans for implementing recommen-the district and civic leaders S meeting the stu-trict expands on a mandatory' three-tier school evaluation system adopted last month by the Arkansas Board of Education for all 310 school districts. The state system I will not operate fully until 2003-2001. I Tier I of the state system calls for all students at a school to achieve at a proficient or advanced level on new bench-mark exams, which will be given in the fourth, sixth and eighth grades, and on specific secondary school exams in literacy, first-year algebra and geometry. The state sy-stem also sets goals for high school graduation, student at-tendance, teacher licensure, ongoing professional development for teachers, and student safety. Also, the state system establishes each district to establish goals or quality indicators of its owm, - Little Rock School District staff recommended quality indicators be based on the scores students earn on two types of tests. The first would be the Stanford .Achievement Test nniinntthh edition, which is a__ n__axti:o__n_anl?ly ' designated as troubled schools by  standardized test that most students ' the state Department of Education I take each September, The second measure would be scores students earn on the districts own tests derived from the districts own cur-riculinn and given to students four times a year in grades two through 11. Separate tests would be used for I kindergarten and first grade. The Little Rock quality indicators, for example, call for 65 percent of students in every subgroup of students, based on race and sex, to score at or above the 50th percentile in reading and math on the Stanford test The indicators further call for 30 percent of students to score above the 75th percentile, or among the top 25 percent of students nationally. No more than 10 percent of Little Rock students should score among I the bottom 25 percent nationally, ac- I cording to the proposed goals. The school district indicators also include a system for measuring each schools rate of progress toward the goals on the Stanford test and on the districts own tests. Other proposed quality indicators for Little Rock schools call for  65 percent of students at a school to be enrolled in either Advanced Place- .A ment courses or prerequisite courses for Advanced Placement classes,  65 percent of a high schools graduates to take at least one Advanced Placement exam, which can provide the student with college credit for  high school work,  100 percent of students taking the Advanced Placement exam to score 3 or better on a scale of 1 to 5,  100 percent of high school seniors to complete all graduation requirements prior to participating in a graduation ceremony. Students now can participate in a ceremony even ' if they need a credit from summer school to aget their diploma,  100 percent of middle school stu-' dents to be enrolled in algebra by  eighth grade,  65 percent of high school stu- ' dents to complete all the high school courses necess^ to earn an honors seal on their diplomas,  65 percent of high school students to take the ACT AssessmenL a college entrance exam,  100 percent of students taking the ACT to earn a score of at least 19, Each school in Little Rock and throughout the state wall publish a-school performance report for parents based on the accountabili^ system results. Schools that do not make adequate progress in meeting goals will and targeted by the Little Rock district for assistance. Schools that do make sufficient progress will be rewarded with public recognition and with nominations for national honors. Representatives from each Little  Rock school will be provided initial training on the accountability system at a workshop at the end of this month. \nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1491","title":"Student handbook, registration, 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":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Education--Arkansas","Education--Standards","Educational innovations","School enrollment","School districts","School management and organization","Student assistance programs","School-age child care","School buses"],"dcterms_title":["Student handbook, registration, 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/1491"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["handbooks"],"dcterms_extent":["61 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_48355","title":"[Susan McCauley, Rosa Parks' niece, possibly with her daughter Bianca] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of: Visual Materials from the Rosa Parks Papers (Library of Congress)."],"dcterms_subject":["African American women","African American girls"],"dcterms_title":["[Susan McCauley, Rosa Parks' niece, possibly with her daughter Bianca] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.48355"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Use digital image. Original served only by appointment because material requires special handling. For more information, see (http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/info/617_apptonly.html)","Publication may be restricted. For general information see \"Visual Materials from the Rosa Parks Papers...,\" (http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/res/689_park.html)"],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1990-2000.gmgpc","portrait photographs1990-2000.gmgpc","group portraits"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_48356","title":"[Susan McCauley's daughter Bianca?] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of: Visual Materials from the Rosa Parks Papers (Library of Congress)."],"dcterms_subject":["African American girls"],"dcterms_title":["[Susan McCauley's daughter Bianca?] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.48356"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Use digital image. Original served only by appointment because material requires special handling. For more information, see (http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/info/617_apptonly.html)","Publication may be restricted. For general information see \"Visual Materials from the Rosa Parks Papers...,\" (http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/res/689_park.html)"],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1990-2000.gmgpc","portrait photographs1990-2000.gmgpc","group portraits"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_745","title":"SWAT visits","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999/2000"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring","School facilities"],"dcterms_title":["SWAT visits"],"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/745"],"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\n1999 School Visit Schedule Tuesday, August 24 Sherwood El. Pinewood El. Sylvan Hills El. Jacksonville Middle \u0026amp; Jr. Jacksonville High A A B B A\u0026amp;B ^-Hall High - Pulaski Heights Middle Wednesday, September 1 A\u0026amp;B Horace, Gene Wednesday, August 25 Baker El. Lawson El. --ALC S* and Apperson Williams Magnet El. txFair High A A B B A\u0026amp;B Lakewood El. Parkhill El. Poplar Street Middle Crestwood El. NLRHS West A A B B A\u0026amp;B Thursday, September 2 Thursday, August 26 '-Mitchell El. ^ibbs Magnet El. (xParkview Magnet High *-\u0026lt;}entral High A B A\u0026amp;B A\u0026amp;B --Southwest Middle -AVilson El. X^loverdale Middle AMabelvale Middle -AdcClellan High A A B B A\u0026amp;B Team A: Horace and Melissa Team B Gene and Margie Friday, August 27 Fuller Junior Mills Margie, Mel. Margie, Mel. I Monday, August 30 Tolleson El. Arnold Drive El. PCSSD Alternative Jacksonville Alternative North Pulaski High Tuesday, August 31 Forest Heights Middle \"Henderson Middle \"IJorace Mann Middle HDunbar Middle A A B B A\u0026amp;B A A B B1999 School Visit Schedule Tuesday, August 24 Wednesday, September 1 Sherwood El. Pinewood El. Sylvan Hills El. lacksonville Middle \u0026amp; Ir. lacksonville High A A B B A\u0026amp;B Baker El. Lawson El. ALC 8 and Apperson Williams Magnet El. Fair High A A B B A\u0026amp;B Wednesday, August 25 Thursday, September 2 Lakewood El. Parkhill El. Poplar Street Middle Crestwood El. NLRHS West A A B B A\u0026amp;B Mitchell El. Gibbs Magnet El. Parkview Magnet High Central High A B A\u0026amp;B A\u0026amp;B Thursday, August 26 Team A: Horace and Melissa Team B: Gene and Margie Southwest Middle Wilson El. Cloverdale Middle Mabelvale Middle McClellan High A A B B A\u0026amp;B Friday, August 27 WRITING DAY Monday, August 30 Tolleson El. Arnold Drive El. PCSSD Alternative North Pulaski High A A B A\u0026amp;B Tuesday, August 31 Forest Heights Middle Henderson Middle Horace Mann Middle Dunbar Middle Hall High A A B B A\u0026amp;BOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 September 27, 1999 Dr. Les Carnine, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Les: As you know, each fall as the school year gets underway, ODM briefly and informally monitors some of the schools in all three districts. The observations we make are in the same vein as those of parents, students, and staff as they enter a building to start the new year. That's why we pay attention to the aspects of a school that are most likely to initially impress those entering it, such as the condition of the grounds, building upkeep and cleanliness, displays and furnishings, student and staff conduct, and so forth. This year, during the week beginning August 26\\ we dropped in on 18 LRSD schools: Gibbs, Mitchell, Williams, and Wilson Elementaries\nall the middle schools (Cloverdale, Dunbar, Forest Heights, Henderson, Mabelvale, Mann, Pulaski Heights, and Southwest)\nall the high schools (Central, Fair, Hall, McClellan, and Parkview)\nand the Alternative Leaning Center. We did not go into individual classrooms except at Mitchell, where we followed up on some of the observations we had made about the buildings condition this past summer. Attached is a list of what we observed at each school. While we were pleased to note some fine preparations for the beginning of the year, we were disappointed in the number of problems we found and hope the district will move expeditiously to address them. We intend for these comments to give you, your administrators, and the principals of these buildings the benefit of our impressions. Therefore, as has been our custom, we will not publish or file these observations at this time, although we might eventually factor them into some aspect of a report. I hope the enclosed information is helpful. Please dont hesitate to call if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Enc. cc: Sadie Mitchell Building principalsGibbs Foreign Languages/International Studies Magnet Elementary School JEe were pleased to note that:  Attractive shrubs and trees surrounded three sides of the building, creating a welcoming atmosphere for students and visitors.  The large, paved play area in back of the building contained well-maintained playground equipment and basketball courts.  Sturdy metal benches attached to the back wall of the building were convenient to the playground.  Consistent with the schools international studies magnet theme, the interior halls were decorated with flags of foreign countries. One display read Welcome in several languages. Another, in a glass case, featured the culture of Greece.  The small media center was attractively furnished and offered six on-line computers for students to use.  The book collection was inviting and the reference collection was up to date.  The cafeteria floor was clean and waxed and furnishings were in good repair.  Restrooms were clean and well supplied.  Mini-posters in the girls restrooms provided helpful hygiene reminders, and the girls restroom in the intermediate wing had a disposal for feminine hygiene products. We also noted some areas that needed attention:  No flags were flying from the flagpole.  The gate on the fence around the play area was in disrepair and compromised the security it was designed to provide.  Three portable buildings housed some of the instructional programs.  The cafeteria ceiling was cluttered with detached wires, once used for hanging displays, that created an unsightly appearance.  Stacks of folding chairs were propped against the wall in the cafeteria.  Many of the ceiling tiles in the cafeteria were broken, loose, cracked, or tom.  The kitchen was very small and crowded. Serving carts and other equipment exacerbated already crowded conditions in kitchen traffic areas.  Missing floor tiles behind the cafeteria serving line created a safety hazard, and a black, gooey substance was oozing through the floor tiles near the pantry.  The dishwasher was broken, forcing the staff to use paper plates.  The odor of natural gas emitted from the oven. A cafeteria worker explained that the pilot light would not stay lit.  Some of the stall doors were missing in both of the girls restrooms that we monitored.  Stall doors in one girls restroom were defaced with graffiti.  One of the sinks in a girls restroom appeared to be on the verge of sliding down the wall.  Holes and gouges in the wall tile, coupled with poor attempts to cover some of them with a cement-like substance, made the girls restrooms very unattractive.  Girls restrooms were not handicapped accessible.Mitchell Elementary School We were pleased to note that:  The campus was free of litter, and district workers were repairing a damaged section of the chain link fence that borders Roosevelt Road.  An easel in the foyer displayed a group portrait of the school staff.  Attractive bulletin boards, flags, and banners brightened the entryway.  Floors were clean, waxed, and shiny, and the carpeting throughout the building was generally clean and in good condition.  The principal indicated that the director, as well as workers from the LRSD Facility Services Department, had been to the school to evaluate the buildings problems.  According to the principal, new covers were being ordered for the flourescent light fixtures.  Students evacuated the building in an orderly fashion during a fire drill.  The media center was well lit and attractively decorated with various book displays. A single computer station provided access to the Internet for staff or student research.  A bulletin board outside the cafeteria recognized all student birthdays for the month of August. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flags were flying from the school flagpole.  A very strong, unpleasant odor permeated the area where an addition adjoined the original structure. The principal said that district workers had called an exterminator to deal with an infestation of bats in the attic, which presumably was causing the strong smell. The exterminator was expected to eliminate the bat population and remove any carcases.  Overflowing water, apparently from clogged gutters, had damaged the roof overhang and decorative brackets.  The covered walkway between the main building and the four-year-old classroom had a damaged roof. The roofing shingles were missing, and the exposed decking was rotten in some spots.  A large tree limb had fallen to the ground near the K-1 building.  The air conditioning in a portion of the building was not working\nonly four of six upstairs rooms were cooled.  Paint was peeling from the ceilings in passageways throughout the building, and several classrooms had paint peeling from their ceilings.  Room 103 had serious water damage to the southwest comer of the room.  Room 204, which is directly above 103, had water damage on its south wall.  The math room, which is in the addition attached to the main building, had water damaged walls.  Pronounced water damage was evident in the stairwell at the north end of the building. A large section of plaster had fallen away, revealing the underlying brick. The surrounding area also showed signs of water damage\npaint peeling back to bare wood, eroding plaster, and wood rot.  The hall carpet at the top of the stairs was frayed and loose.  In the four-year-old classroom and some rooms in the K-1 building, the carpet was stained, worn, and unsightly.Mitchell Elementary School Page 2  The hall paint was worn in spots.  The hall ceiling above the library office area was marred by a large metal plate that had been attached to cover, rather than correct, some ceiling problems.  The media center, though clean and attractive, was extremely small and crowded. Carpet near the windows was tom and the ceiling showed residual stains from leaks.  The cafeteria floor near the waste barrels was wet with milk from breakfast.  The textured ceiling in the cafeteria was in a deplorable state with areas where the textured material was entirely missing and others where the material hung perilously over the tables.  The girls restroom on the second floor landing lacked soap, was not accessible to the handicapped, had one sink with very low water pressure, and the toilet paper rolls were simply propped up rather than being placed on the roller.  The boys restroom on the second floor landing still had an odor problem, which has been chronic.Williams Traditional Magnet School We -were pleased to note that:  The large playground surrounding the school offered many options for student recreation, including a soccer field, paved play area with well-maintained play equipment, a grassy hillside, and many trees.  Well-tended flowering shrubs decorated the grounds in tfont of the school.  The interior corridors were clean and tidy. School displays and potted plants decorated the entry foyer, and cases in the hallways featured interesting exhibits,  Attractive banners outside the classrooms identified the teachers.  Students were very friendly and quick to offer assistance.  The staff were dressed in a very professional manner.  The combination of new furniture, good-looking carpet, and an attractive book collection created an inviting media center.  The media center had four on-line computers available for student use.  The stainless steel appliances in the kitchen sparkled like new.  The kitchen ceiling was freshly painted, giving the area a clean, bright appearance.  The restrooms were clean and supplied with soap and paper products. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The building was not secured, as side entries were unlocked.  Both main entries to the building lacked wheelchair ramps.  Four portable buildings were in use in the back of the main building. The fibre board underpinning for one was rotted, broken, and unsightly.  The area near the folding divider that separated the gym and the cafeteria was cluttered with carts, electric wires, sound equipment, and stacks of folding chairs.  The stage was cluttered with folded tables, desks, and boxes.  The cafeteria floor was missing several tiles, and the ceiling had several loose tiles.  The picnic-style tables were flush with the cafeteria wall at one end, creating possible traffic problems.  Rolling carts and large pails impeded traffic circulation in the food preparation and serving areas.  One stall in a girls restroom had an out of order sign.  Graffiti was present in a girls restroom in the primary wing.  The girls restrooms were not handicapped accessible.Wilson Elementary School lEe were pleased to note that:  The grass was mowed and the campus was free of litter.  Blooming crape myrtles and a neatly edged flower bed enhanced the exterior of the school.  The interior floors were clean, waxed, and shiny.  The main hall was brightened by three attractive, large murals that had been designed by an LRSD artist and painted by the teachers.  A large map of the revised LRSD elementary attendance zones hung near the office.  The main office area was attractively decorated, bright, and welcoining.  The school secretary greeted visitors in a very warm and engaging fashion.  Displays in the media center created an attractive and inviting environment.  The media center gave students access to word processing and the Internet.  The cafeteria was exceptionally clean and featured a good balance of artificial and natural light.  The boys restrooms were very clean and in good repair. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flags were flying from the pole in front of the school.  The school had no parking lot for staff or visitors.  An asphalt play surface was cracked and covered with tree debris and rocks.  The campus included two very bedraggled portable classroom buildings. The portable labeled reading clinic had a hole in its metal shell and the metal skirting was ripped and loose.  The P.E. class for four-year-olds was being conducted in a developmentally inappropriate manner. The instructor spoke to the children harshly, continually reprimanding them and shaking his finger at them. The children were not engaged in organized games or play. The instructor had them run around the perimeter of the playground twice and then allowed them to play on the equipment. The children were treated like a high school football squad rather than a group of pre-school students.  The diminutive size of the media center placed a premium on student work space and storage space.  While the girls restroom off the main hall was clean and supplied, it was not handicapped accessible, water pressure in two of the sinks was very low, and the wall near the door had a gaping hole.  Toilet paper and paper towels were missing from the boys restroom nearest the intermediate level classrooms.Cloverdale Middle School Academy We were pleased to note that:  Both the U.S. and the Arkansas flags were flying in front of the school  The grounds featured many stately oak trees, providing shaded areas for students. Flowering crape myrtles graced the entire front of the building.  The exterior ramps were covered with awnings, and the lockers lining the walls were in good repair.  Security personnel were clearly visible on campus.  Furnishings in the media center were of good quality, and a dropped ceiling was a great improvement over the old ceiling.  Five on-line computers were available for student use in the media center.  Air temperature in the cafeteria was mercifully cool on an extremely warm day\neven the kitchen was air conditioned.  Restrooms were clean and free of litter, and the girls restrooms had fragrance dispensers.  One girls restroom was handicapped accessible, including two rails. We also noted some areas needing attention:  Litter and broken furniture were visible on much of the campus.  The awnings over the exterior corridors were cluttered with numerous exposed intercom wires.  Some of the students (and adults) seemed confused about a buzzer signaling the end of the physical activity portion of gym class. Several students from other classes headed toward their next class and had to be instructed to return to their rooms.  Carpeting on the stage was soiled, tom. and stained. Tape residue clung to one portion of the carpet. Also, clothing, large, trash-filled bags, broken pieces of Styrofoam, and pieces of classroom furniture littered the stage.  Several discarded cardboard boxes were stacked against one wall in the cafeteria.  A water fountain in the cafeteria was inoperable.  Wood logs were scattered at the back door of the cafeteria.  The girls restrooms were not completely stocked with paper products or soap and lacked disposal units for hygiene products.  The lights were out in one girls restroom.  The walls in one girls restrooms were badly stained, marred, chipped, and scratched. One wall had a very large crack along the door jamb.  Some of the stalls in a girls restroom had graffiti.  One girls restroom was not handicapped accessible, and the restroom next to it, marked with a handicapped sign, was locked.  One restroom on a back ramp was not labeled as to gender.Dunbar International Studies/Gifted Talented Education Magnet Middle School iVe were pleased to note that:  Campus doors were locked, except for the main entrance.  Parts of the campus were well tended and featured flower beds and flowering shrubs alongside new and widened walkways.  The terrazzo floors near the main entry were shiny and attractive.  Adults were visible during class change.  The media center contained several models representing student work. The book collection was extensive and attractive and was supplemented by four on-line computers.  Furnishings in the cafeteria were in good repair.  The restrooms were amply supplied with paper products and soap.  The stalls in the girls restrooms had disposal units for feminine hygiene products.  One girls restroom had a handicapped accessible stall with two handrails. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flags were flying from the flagpole in front of the school.  The front of the building, which was the only entrance with unlocked doors, was not wheelchair accessible.  The bed of plants at the main entrance needed weeding.  Security officers were not immediately visible during our visit.  Walkways near the Wright Avenue side of the campus were broken and hazardous, and others were overgrown with grass.  A pile of broken and discarded furniture sat outside the band room.  The non-shp covers on the stair treads and risers were broken in many places, and thus unsightly as well as hazardous.  The large, glass-enclosed exhibit cabinet in the east foyer (which in previous years had held vibrant displays related to the school theme) was completely empty, and the small bulletin board in the west foyer was blank.  The clock suspended by the main office did not tell the correct time by several hours.  A locker door on the first floor was missing, and numerous lockers throughout the school were defaced with black smudges and marks.  A window in the bank of interior hall windows on room 201 was broken. Most of the small, interior hall windows throughout the building were dusty and smudged, if not outright filthy.  Fire extinguisher cases in the corridors were empty, and no fire extinguisher was visible in the cafeteria,  Several walls and classroom doors were defaced with graffiti and marred by extraneous dirt.  The veneer on some classroom doors was split or missing in pieces.  The media center carpet was stained, frayed, and soiled.  A large area of ceiling panel was missing outside of the cafeteria.  Several floor tiles and ceiling tiles in the cafeteria were broken, cracked, or gouged,  Windows in the cafeteria were filthy.Dunbar International Studies/Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Education Magnet Middle School Page 2  Some floors were neither clear nor waxed\nothers were waxed, but the wax had been applied over dirt or, in the case of the cafeteria, dark, ugly scuff marks.  The kitchen tile around two large floor drains was cracked and broken.  Carts and containers created traffic flow problems in the food preparation and serving areas.  Sanitation problems in the kitchen included a missing ceiling vent cover and evidence of rodents.  Due to a lack of ventilation in the kitchens laundry room, the walls were covered with mildew and stains.  The identifying signs were missing from the girls restrooms located on the second and third floors.  A strong sewer smell emanated from the girls locker room.  Shower stalls in the girls locker room were corroded, stained, filled with trash, and covered with graffiti, as were the lockers, walls, and many other surface areas. The locker room looked like a garbage dump.  The girls locker room was not handicapped accessible.  The boys locker room contained huge swaths of material hanging from over half of the ceiling and a vertical crack, approximately 1/2\" wide, reached down an entire wall. Other structural cracks were noted in other parts of the locker room.  Shower stalls in the boys locker room were so stained and corroded that they were unusable.  Graffiti was rampant in the boys locker room and the facility contained no soap or paper products.  A staff person reported leaks in an area above the gymnasium floor.Forest Heights Middle School We were pleased to note that:  The campus was free of litter and the grass was mowed.  The terraced planting beds added five years ago were filled with healthy greenery that greatly enhanced the entry to the school.  The five-year-old main building looked as neat, clean, and attractive as it did at the dedication ceremony.  Security personnel were visible throughout the school.  Floors were clean and waxed to a mirror-like shine.  A spacious stair landing had been transformed into an attractive student art gallery.  Posters with encouraging and inspirational sayings were present throughout the building.  The teaching staff were especially friendly and helpful.  Banners that identified the middle school learning teams were found throughout the building.  The sixth grade area of the building featured a wealth of displays and examples of student work.  The sixth grade wing included displays featuring team names (such as New Centurions, Shooting Stars, and Aviators) that gave evidence of the middle school teaming concept.  The media center was in excellent condition and had attractive furnishings. Computer work stations provided students with word processing capability, as well as Internet access.  The gymnasium was clean and in good repair. The basketball floor was shiny and well maintained.  The cafeteria was clean and the tables and chairs were in good repair.  The boys restrooms were well supplied, clean, odor-free, and handicapped accessible.  The girls restrooms were clean, odor free, supplied with paper products, and accessible to the handicapped. We also noted some areas needing attention:  We found no flags flying.  Above the checkout desk in the media center, two flourescent tubes were not working.  The doors to the cafeteria were badly scarred and in need of paint.  Ceiling tiles near the cafeteria exit were marred and insulation was clearly visible where several tiles were missing entirely.  Carpet in one classroom was clean but terribly wrinkled, causing a tripping hazard.  Paint was peeling from the ceiling of the boys restroom adjacent to the gymnasium.  One girls restroom lacked soap, and one of the sinks had no running water.Henderson Middle School We were pleased to note:  The U.S. flag was flying from the schools flagpole.  Security personnel greeted visitors at the front door.  Student team names appeared on a bulletin board near the main office as evidence of the teaming aspect of the middle school concept.  Students greeted us in a friendly manner.  The main interior hallway was bright due to the natural light from skylights and relatively new paint. The sponge-painted accents in the hallway provided tor a nice overall effect.  Students were quiet and orderly during a class change.  Some hallways had student work on display.  The media center was roomy enough to provide for adequate student seating, as well as space for computer work stations.  The media center contained computers that students could use for Internet research and also for word processing.  The cafeteria was clean and the design provided for good traffic flow.  Boys restrooms were generally clean with sinks, toilets, and urinals operating normally. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The campus was not properly secured\nseveral exterior doors were propped open.  A few areas of the campus were littered. While the soccer field had some trash barrels, the number is not adequate during soccer season, when the fields are used by the school and the YMCA.  The courtyard areas, which could be very attractive if better maintained, were filled with weeds, debris, and fallen leaves.  During the class change, a security guard bellowed at the students who attempted to go to their lockers. While the school does restrict student access to lockers, security guards should endeavor to present a pleasant demeanor, rather than acting like drill sergeants.  Paint was badly peeling from an exterior wall in one of the courtyards.  The blue paint on the exterior doors was faded.  Beyond the sixth grade area, teaming was not as visually apparent as in other parts of the school.  On one hallway, pictures used to represent various careers depicted women in non-traditional roles, but showed very few African-Americans.  Gum residue was stuck to the hallway floors.  The carpeting in the media center was clean but so worn that it was taped together in several places.  In several hallways, fire extinguishers were missing from their recesses.  The boys restrooms lacked paper towels and the lights were not on in the boys restroom nearest the main office.  The girls restroom nearest the office was pitch dark. The ceiling fixture was not working, and a monitor could not locate a light switch. Since the room had no windows or skylights, it was impossible to monitor and nearly unusable (although we observed a few brave souls emerge from the dark room). Another girls restroom was locked.Mabelvale Middle School We were pleased to note that:  The campus was secured and security personnel were visible.  The brick exterior of the building was in good repair, and the walks and ramps were in good condition.  The posts supporting the ramp awnings were color-coded so that students teams could easily identify the areas of their classrooms.  Lockers lining the walls of the ramps were in excellent condition.  Glass blocks framed the office door and provided an attractive accent.  The one-way traffic flow pattern helped to ensure orderly class changes free of congestion.  The media center was an attractive workplace for students and offered sLx on-line computers.  Students attending an assembly in the cafeteria were attentive and very well behaved.  Furnishings in the cafeteria were clean and in good repair.  Ceiling fans in the cafeteria provided some relief from the summer heat.  An attractively decorated display board featured the names of the cafeteria workers.  The restrooms were adequately furnished with paper products.  Restrooms were clean\nmirrors and sinks sparkled. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flags were flying from the flagpole.  The campus was littered with paper, especially around the dumpster, and several landscaping timbers had been left in a pile near the front entrance.  On August 26, the marquee was still featuring an August 4-5 registration announcement.  The exposed wiring along the awnings over the ramps was unsightly.  The courtyard contained a lone, wrought iron bench with sagging wooden slats, creating a desolate scene.  Floors in the cafeteria were gouged and several areas of tile were missing, while other areas were covered with mismatched tiles.  Metal facing on a cafeteria door was cracked and broken.  The cafeteria lacked sufficient seating to accommodate students during lunch, and crowding of the tables congested the traffic flow.  The small kitchen lacked sufficient aisle space, creating traffic problems during food preparation and serving, and lighting was poor.  One of the girls restrooms was poorly lit.  Swaths of mismatched paint had been applied to the walls in one girls restroom, while in another restroom, large areas of the finish had been scoured off the metal stall dividers.  The girls restrooms lacked soap.  One girls restroom, which was designed for wheelchair accessibility, had only one side rail in the stall.Horace Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet We were pleased to note that:  State and national flags were properly displayed from the flagpole.  Security personnel were visible.  Grassy courtyards, furnished with benches and well-trimmed shrubs, created a welcoming appearance for students and visitors,  Displays were very colorful and eye catching.  Large murals painted on the brick exteriors showcased the arts theme.  The media center contained five on-line computers for student use.  The cafeteria was well ventilated and cool on a very hot day.  The large cafeteria provided plenty of space for good traffic flow.  Several murals, mostly celebrating racial diversity, provided a pleasing backdrop during meals.  The girls restrooms were clean. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The campus was not secure: exterior gates were open or unlocked.  Although a covered walkway extended from the main building to the auxiliary building, the walkway was not wheelchair accessible.  Parts of the campus were littered and unkempt.  The back driveway had a series of potholes.  The exterior masonry walls were seriously cracked in several places.  The entiy doors to the English annex were damaged and dirty.  The plexiglass windows at the auditoriums entrance were scratched, ugly, and barely transparent.  Some classrooms had evidence of ceiling leaks.  Most drinking fountains were not operable.  Despite decent-looking carpet and ceiling tiles, the media center appeared shabby. The furniture was a mixed collection of hand-me-downs, some with imitation walnut finish and others with a blond veneer. The book collection looked seedy and the reference collection was outdated. AV equipment covered the tables in the reading room.  Some tables in the cafeteria were chipped, gouged, or broken\ntape reside marred the table tops.  The ceiling leaked in the cafeteria, and several ceiling panels in the cafeteria were missing.  Recent patch jobs on the kitchen ceiling had not been painted, creating an unfinished appearance.  None of the three girls restrooms located in the main building or in the auxiliary building were handicapped accessible.  Water pressure was extremely low in the girls restrooms.  Several stalls in a girls restroom had no toilet paper, and three of the four restrooms had no paper towels.  Two girls restrooms were missing stall doors.  Although all of the light fixtures in the entry to the girls restrooms had bulbs, none of them were operating. When queried, a custodian remarked, Those lights arc not necessary,  Two boysrestrooms were locked. Two others should have been\neach was smelly, only partly functional, and had no soap or paper products.Pulaski Heights Middle School IVe were pleased to note that:  Much of the original brick floor was still attractive and in good repair.  The hallways were clean, well lit, and free of litter.  Bulletin boards and posters gave evidence of middle school teaming.  A book fair was in progress, so the media center was more cramped than usual, but still provided a pleasant atmosphere.  Seven on-line computers complemented the substantial book and reference collection in the media center.  The auditorium was clean and in good repair, since persistent leaks had been stopped and fresh plaster and paint applied to the walls.  The gymnasium was clean and bright.  The basketball playing floor had been recently refinished and the bleachers were in good repair.  The cafeteria was generally clean and the walls had been recently repaired and painted in the school colors.  The restrooms were functional and well supplied. We also noted some areas needins attention:  No flags were flying from the flagpole near the main entry.  The brick structure near the main entrance, designed to serve as a ground-level marquee, was devoid of the schools name, and the planters on either side sported nothing but dead weeds.  A pile of broken and discarded furniture cluttered a back courtyard.  The protective coverings on the stair steps were broken and hazardous in several areas.  The space created for the media center was too small for the size of the schools enrollment.  Several flourescent tubes were not working in the cafeteria.  Some ceiling tiles in the cafeteria were marred, broken, or entirely missing.  The floor was noticeable gouged in the cafeteria near a serving line and at the entrance to the auditorium.  Wall tiles on two of the boys restrooms were missing, leaving unsightly exposed plaster.  One boys restroom was littered.Southwest Middle School iVe were pleased to note that:  The grass was mowed and the campus was free of litter.  The hall floors were clean and shiny.  Security personnel were visible.  The school mission statement was prominent in several locations in the building.  Bulletin board and shadow box displays featured student organizations such as the Gentlemens Club.  Middle school teaming was evident through bulletin boards and hallway displays.  The media center was well organized, clearly labeled, and had adequate student work space.  Computer stations in the library provided students with word processing and Internet access.  The cafeteria was large enough for a smooth flow of student traffic during the lunch period.  The boys restrooms were generally clean.  The girls restrooms were clean and fully supplied. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flags were flying from the school flagpole.  The school was not landscaped, but a few mature trees dotted the perimeter of the campus.  The metal windows were rusted in spots.  The campus was not secured: some exterior doors (other than the front door) were unlocked and some classroom doors were propped open.  Several hallway flourescent lights were burned out.  The cinder block wall at the south end of the main hall showed signs of water damage.  Wall paint in the 500 hall appeared old and dingy.  The ceiling tiles nearest the assistant principals suite were gouged.  Several cafeteria tables were worn and badly chipped.  Toast, milk cartons, and other breakfast refuse littered the lunch line area,  The physical condition of the boys restrooms varied. The restroom at the far end of the main hallway had gouged walls, broken wall and floor tiles, peeling paint, and was not well lit. The restroom nearest the gymnasium was clean and well supplied, but had a constantly running urinal and rusted heating unit.  Not all of the boys restrooms were adequately supplied with toilet paper and soap.  A girls restroom lacked adequate lighting, and the walls and stalls were defaced with graffiti. In this same restroom, the toilet paper dispenser was missing from the handicapped stall.Central International Studies High School We were pleased to note that:  Both the state and national flags were properly displayed on flag pole in front of the school.  The grounds were very attractive. The grass was mowed and we noted only a few pieces of litter on the entire campus. A wealth of blooming crape myrtles accented the front of the school, and the planting beds were neat and filled with shrubs and ornamental grasses.  Security personnel and equipment were visible throughout the building. Security measures included cameras in the corridors and kiosks strategically situated throughout the main level.  Colorful banners and posters promoting school spirit were displayed in many areas of the building.  Shadow boxes on the main level featured student artwork.  The interior corridors were well lit and lined with lockers in good repair.  Floors were clean and polished.  The stonework in the foyer had been repaired.  The media center included a large bank of computers for students to use for on-line research and word processing.  Appropriate spirit symbols decorated the gymnasium.  The gyms fold-away bleachers appeared to be in good repair, and the hardwood playing surface had a good, shiny finish.  The cafeteria was well ventilated and comfortably cool on a very warm day.  The cafeteria was clean and furnishings were in good repair.  Newly installed serving rails provided an orderly flow of traffic in the cafeteria.  The cafeteria ceiling paint was in excellent condition, giving the appearance of having been recently done, although a custodian indicated that it hadnt been painted in six years.  The kitchen area was very spacious and free of clutter.  Girls restrooms had paper products and were free of litter immediately after lunch period.  Both of the girls restrooms monitored were handicapped accessible, including two handrails. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The shell of a wrecked car, apparently used in a senior bash, remained in one comer of the student parking lot. The vehicle, which consisted of jagged metal, broken glass, and scribbled obscenities, posed a safety hazard and was unsightly.  The area around the school dumpsters was cluttered with discarded furniture and cardboard boxes.  The rubberized covering on the landing of the main entry steps was cracked, tom, and unattractive.  The campus was not secured: monitors entered through an open door in a custodians shop\nanother door at the back of the school also was propped open.  Few adults were present during a class change.  The two-way traffic flow on the stairs created serious congestion during class changes.  Many surfaces in the corridors were defaced by graffiti.  Trophy cases were covered with dust, and the trophies were grimy and tarnished.  Large sections of ceiling panels were missing on the lower level.  In numerous locations throughout the building, wall paint had bubbled and plaster flaked due to moisture. Many corridor walls on the third level had been damaged severely by moisture.Central International Studies High School Page 2  Plexiglass windows in various parts of the building were so marred by scratches, tape residue, and past cleaning attempts that they had been rendered opaque rather than transparent,  Several hallway flourescent lights were inoperative.  The media center was plagued by leaks and the resulting deterioration of plaster. The problem was particularly severe in the media center boys restroom.  The ceiling had peeled severely in a maintenance room and the carpet was soiled and mildewed.  The concrete block building attached to the west side of the gym was badly cracked and in danger of falling.  Window panes in the back of the gymnasium had been replaced with plywood that was peeling and unsightly.  The handle and overhead sill of the auditorium door were broken.  The auditorium carpeting was soiled and the stage was littered.  No fire extinguishers were found in the cafeteria.  A section of tile near a kitchen floor drain was badly cracked, chipped, and broken.  Large sections of paint were peeling from the walls in the kitchen, indicating moisture problems.  Disconnected pipes from a former drinking fountain protruded from a support column.  Neither girls restroom observed had soap or disposal containers for feminine hygiene products.  A toilet in one girls restroom was inoperable and a toilet in another was stopped up.  One of the girls restrooms showed evidence of water damage, especially around the window casing.  One girls restroom had a missing ceiling panel and push-down faucets that were very difficult to operate\nanother had a large section of broken wall, exposing sewage drain pipes.  A third floor boys restroom had been vandalized: the Formica edging around the counter top had peeled off, and the cover to the flushing mechanism for the urinals was missing, leaving a gaping hole in the wall.J. A. Fair High School IVe were pleased to note that:  The U.S. flag was displayed on the flagpole in fi'ont of the school.  The grass was mowed and the campus was free of litter.  Doors throughout the campus were locked, security cameras were mounted in the corridors, and security personnel were visible.  Staff\" members greeted us in a friendly fashion.  The entry foyer and interior corridors were clean and free of litter and debris.  Most corridors were lined with lockers in good repair.  A mural with a musical theme adorned the wall adjacent to one of the music classrooms.  The media center, which featured automated checkout, had computers available for word processing and Internet research.  The media center was replete with student projects on display.  The cafeteria was clean and fi'ee of litter.  Traffic flow in the kitchen during lunch hour was smooth.  Both gyms were clean and ready for use\nseveral championship banners decorated the walls.  The bleachers in the varsity gym were clean and in good repair.  The restrooms were fiee of litter and well supplied. We also noted some areas needing attention:  While the large planting bed near the entry had the potential to be attractive, it was choked with weeds and drought-stricken annuals.  Although security personnel questioned each one, several students were in the corridors well after the class change.  Some of the hall ceiling tiles were stained and ripped.  Floor tiles in one section of the hallway were cracked.  Some hall drinking fountains were inoperable.  Several ceiling tiles in the hallway to the auxiliary gym were damaged or missing.  The louvered door to one gym dressing room was damaged to the point of allowing anyone to see into the area.  In the media center, the addition of computer stations significantly decreased the already limited amount of student work space.  In a work area adjacent to the media center, leaking water pooled inside the cover of a flourescent Ught fixture.  Tables in the cafeteria were chipped and gouged.  One serving counter was propped on a wooden board.  The floor was buckled in Ifont of the serving counter\ntiles were chipped, cracked, and broken.  In the kitchen, water damage was evident in the pantry area, and some ceiling panels were loose, missing, or food-splattered.  A cafeteria worker reported evidence of rodents.  The air conditioning was broken in the kitchen area and the air temperature was stifling.  Walls and stalls in the girls restrooms were scuffed, stained, and marred.  One girls restroom was not handicapped accessible.  One of the toilets in a girls restroom was stopped up by a discarded sanitary napkin. Although the restrooms had disposal units for feminine hygiene products, they were inconveniently located outside of the stalls.  While the girls restrooms were supplied with toilet paper, the rolls were lying on the floor. The restrooms also lacked soap dishes. As a result, scummy soap residue had accumulated in all areas surrounding the sinks.Hall University Studies High School We were pleased to note that:  Security personnel were visible.  Many of the planting beds were filled with masses of blooming annuals.  The grass was mowed and the campus was free of litter.  The interior corridors were clean and shiny in both buildings.  Students were fnendly and helpful to us.  Lockers were in good repair.  Hallway displays, posters, and banners proclaimed school spirit.  The media center was spacious and attractive.  The media center, which was in the process of implementing an automated checkout system for materials, also had computers that students could use for Internet research and word processing.  The gymnasium was clean and bright and made good use of school colors to enhance its appearance.  The hardwood basketball court was refinished and clean.  Furnishings in the cafeteria were in good repair.  Air temperature in the cafeteria and kitchen was excellent.  Floors and walls in the girls restrooms were clean.  Girls restrooms contained disposal units for feminine hygiene products. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flags were flying from the schools flagpole.  One security guard was observed with his arm around a female student, and a police officer was seated alone in a parked squad car with a female student. Security personnel and resource officers should exercise great care in their interaction with students and the appearance of their behavior.  Electrical wires laid in a tangle near the football field.  The temporary bleachers near the football field were broken and hazardous, due to exposed and jagged metal edges.  The tennis courts were in a state of pronounced decay with flaked and rough concrete and a sagging net.  The ceiling tiles in the 700 building were sagging and broken.  Some fire extinguisher cases were empty.  Several ceiling tiles were missing in the hallway near the journalism class.  Sections of baseboards were worn and loose in several areas of the building.  Students traveling in four directions in the area outside the cafeteria during the lunch transition period created serious congestion. Students entering and exiting from the same doors created bottlenecks.  Cafeteria tables were placed too close together, compromising movement and severely limiting egress during an emergency.  The cafeteria lacked sufficient seating for the number of students present\nas a result, some students were five or six minutes late for third period class.  A water leak over the kitchens vent-a-hood created a safety hazard.Hall University Studies High School Page 2  Narrow food preparation lanes, coupled with loose and broken floor tiles, created safety hazards.  Flaking ceiling material over the serving counter created a health hazard.  One floor drain was stopped up, another drained slowly, and a stool covered a large open drain in the food preparation area, causing a safety hazard.  Cafeteria workers reported electrical overload problems and evidence of rodents.  The kitchen door contained a large hole and one window pane was cracked.  A section of floor tile was missing from around the sink in the kitchen.  None of the girls restrooms inspected was handicapped accessible.  One girls restroom lacked soap and not all stalls had toilet paper.  The stall dividers in one girls restroom were covered with graffiti.  The boys restroom near the library had been vandalized: sink handles were broken and a stall door was missing.McClellan Business/Communications Magnet We were pleased to note that:  The grass was mowed and the campus was free of litter.  The security staff was visible,  A student-drawn mural of cell division decorated the science hall.  The business education hallway was filled with colorful, attractive displays and the myriad of business education awards received by students.  The media center provided adequate seating for classes of students.  Materials checkout in the media center was automated and the facihty had computers with Internet research and word processing capability.  Drawings of authors from diverse cultural backgrounds (such as Maya Angelou and Mark Twain) decorated the media center.  The gymnasium was colorful and clean, and the bleachers appeared to be in good repair.  Spirit emblems lent a festive atmosphere to the gym.  The cafeteria floor was gleaming.  Cafeteria furnishings were well spaced, leaving ample room for lunch traffic.  Student portrait art added a nice touch to the surroundings in the cafeteria.  The girls restrooms were supplied with paper products.  Girls restroom stalls had disposal units for feminine hygiene products.  Although it was lunch period, the girls restrooms were free of litter. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flags were flying from the flagpole.  The large planters in front of the school were filled with dying shrubs and weeds.  Corridors were very congested during class change, exacerbating the noise level.  The corridors were bleak and unattractive due to dirty concrete floors, metal roofing with lots of visible wire and ducts, and general neglect.  In the cafeteria, several ceiling panels were tom or loose and several floor tiles were cracked and chipped.  Some of the tables in the cafeteria were badly chipped or gouged.  In the serving area, a missing ceiling panel and a large floor drain created health and safety hazards.  The floor tiles in the kitchen were cracked, chipped, gouged, or broken.  Graffiti covered nearly all the wall space in the girls restrooms.  A student indicated that she and her classmates had painted the restrooms, but the job was characterized by poor brush strokes, insufficient coverage, and paint splatters, which were among the best things that could be said about the girls restrooms.  In one girls restroom, some stalls had no doors, including the one for handicapped students.  Walls and sinks in a girls restroom were dirty and stained and one restroom had dried tissue wads dotting the ceiling.  A metal grate had been pried from the wall in a girls restroom.  Girls were smoking in one restroom.  The boys restrooms had been markedly abused: the stark red-and-blue walls, messy paint, vandalized paper holders, litter, and graffiti all combined to create an unappealing whole.Parkview Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet We were pleased to note that:  The U.S. and Arkansas flags were flying from the flagpole in front of the school.  The grass was mowed and the campus was free of litter.  Security staff was visible throughout the building.  Interior corridors were clean and their design allowed easy movement for students during class changes.  Thematic murals appropriate to the disciplines decorated the halls near the music, art, history, and science departments.  Some hallways displayed student artwork.  The gymnasium playing surface was gleaming and in excellent condition. The bleachers were in good repair and free of graffiti. The gymnasium temperature was bearable despite outside temperatures in the mid-90's.  The south cafeteria had a colorful mural that brightened the facility.  Floors in both cafeterias were clean and waxed.  Air temperature in the cafeteria was excellent on a very warm day.  The addition of a lunch period resulted in fewer students per shift, thus eliminating crowding in the eating areas and long waits in the serving lines.  Girls restrooms were clean and litter free right after lunch.  Stall in the girls restrooms had disposal units for feminine hygiene products. We also noted some areas needing attention:  Some of the sidewalks were cracked and effaced.  Exterior trim paint was faded and weathered.  The school was crowded. The enrollment increase had caused the school to use all possible classroom space, and the district had brought in three portables for additional classrooms: a single portable was located on the upper campus and two double portables were located on the lower end of the campus. The lack of space is a particular concern due to some of the specialized types of courses offered at Parkview.  The concrete steps adjacent to the gymnasium leading to the lower campus were effaced.  The empty display cases in one area of the building were very unappealing.  A front panel was missing from a hall fountain.  Most of the plexiglass windows were scratched and ugly.  Wires to the intercom were strung along the corridor ceiling without benefit of ductwork. Although it had 22 computers for research and word processing, the media center was not fully usable due the construction of the adjacent dance studio.  The north cafeteria was dull and institutional in appearance.  The picnic-style tables were flush against the wall at one end of the cafeteria, creating limited egress in case of an emergency evacuation.  The kitchens food preparation area was narrow and congested, and loose ceiling tiles created a health hazard.  In the girls restroom, one vent cover was hanging from the ceiling and another was missing.  Girls restroom #203 was locked.  Sinks in the girls restrooms needed scrubbing.  Water pressure in one girls restroom was very low and the feminine hygiene products dispenser was inoperable.  A stall door in one of the girls restroom was too small and fit only halfway across the front of the handicapped accessible stall, eliminating all semblance of privacy for the user.  Two of the boys restrooms were in a state of serious disrepair and neglect. One of the restrooms had large, gaping holes in the walls.  Neither of the boys restrooms monitored were clean or supplied with paper towels.LRSD Alternative Learning Center (ALC) We were pleased to note that:  The exterior doors to the facility were locked.  Security personnel were highly visible throughout the building.  The brick exterior of the building was in good repair, grass and shrubs were neatly tended, and a new security fence had been installed on the north side of the campus.  Four huge magnolia trees shaded the west side of the building.  Interior corridors were immaculate and the concrete floors glistened.  Instead of a conventional media center for the nontraditional program, the school used computers in every classroom for programmed instruction and Internet research.  The cafeteria floor was gleaming and furnishings were in good repair.  The restrooms were clean and supplied with paper products and soap. We also noted some areas needing attention:  Asa former elementary school, the ALC had a flagpole, but no flags were flying.  The school did not have a ramp for handicapped access.  The carpet in the entry to the office was tom and frayed, due to the door constantly dragging across it.  Exposed intercom wires were stmng along the ceiling of the main corridor.  The kitchen area was in poor repair: the sink was stopped up, dead water bugs were present, the milk cooler was not operating, the mixer was broken, and the temperature was stifling.  Evidence of water damage was prevalent in several places on the kitchens ceiling and walls.  Walls in the cafeteria was stained, scuffed, and marred.  The cafeteria did not have a fire extinguisher.  The stage was cluttered with folding tables and chairs, and stage curtains were stained, tom, and faded. The wall at the base of the stage had a large hole.  The girls restrooms were not handicapped accessible.  In one of the girls restroom, pipes and fittings protmded from the walls where fixtures had been removed, and graffiti defaced one wall.  Ceiling tiles in a girls restroom were cracked, walls were water-damaged, and a sewer pipe cover was detached from one wall.  The boys restrooms had been vandalized, resulting in a missing stall door and unusable paper holders.Date: June 14, 2000 To\nAll Associates From: Re: AnrTH------- L End-of-School SWAT Visits Since vacations are beginning to scatter us, please finish the write-ups on your end-of-school visits by the close of the day on this coming Friday, June 16. Use the same format as on the beginning- of-the-year SW.AT visits, and collate them all together on one disc. Polly can help if needed. TH be reviewing them when I return from my trip next Monday, and will pass them on to the appropriate superintendents. Thanks.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 August 15, 2000 Dr. Les Gamine, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Les: You 11 recall that every year as the new term gets underway, we make informal visits to a few schools, write up our observations in a brief format, and share them with you. As we once again prepare for this same type of fall monitoring for the coming school year, I find that I have neglected to give you a bit of information that we generated as the 1999-2000 school year was drawing to a close. I apologize for my oversight. Before school ended last June, we made a return visit to some of the LRSD schools that we had monitored in the fall and in which we noted some facility problems. Our purpose was to see whether the deficiencies we saw earlier in the year had changed by the time school year was about over. Enclosed are those observations. I hope they will prove useful to you. Best wishes for an exciting and rewarding new school year. Sincerely yours, CJktA Ann S. Brown Enc.Mitchell Elementary School Fall 1999: Selected Areas of Concern Spring 2000 Findings  No flags were flying from the school flagpole.  The U.S. flag was flying from the pole in front of the school.  A very strong, unpleasant odor permeated the area where an addition adjoined the original structure. The principal said that district workers had called an exterminator to deal with an infestation of bats in the attic, which presumably was causing the strong smell. The exterminator was expected to eliminate the bat population and remove any carcases.  According to the principal, bat removal had been successfully completed prior to the Thanksgiving holidays. Eliminating the bats also eliminated the odor problem.  Overflowing water, apparently from clogged gutters, had damaged the roof overhang and decorative brackets.  The covered walkway between the main building and the four-year-old classroom had a damaged roof. The roofing shingles were missing, and the exposed decking was rotten in some spots.  Exterior trim and brick work still suffered from water damage, but repairs are reported to be scheduled that include waterproofing the brick.  The air conditioning in a portion of the building was not working\nonly four of six upstairs rooms were cooled.  The air conditioning had been repaired.  Room 103 had serious water damage to the southwest comer of the room.  Room 204, which is directly above 103, had water damage on its south wall.  The math room, which is in the addition attached to the main building, had water damaged walls.  Pronounced water damage was evident in the stairwell at the north end of the building. A large section of plaster had fallen away, revealing the underlying brick. The surrounding area also showed signs of water damage: paint peeling back to bare wood, eroding plaster, and wood rot.  Damaged walls in the hall landing and the classrooms had been repaired and repainted.  The hall carpet at the top of the stairs was frayed and loose.Mitchell School Page 2  In the four-year-old classroom and some rooms in the K-1 building, the carpet was stained, worn, and unsightly.  No improvements in the carpet, but carpet slated for repair or replacement beginning in the summer.  The cafeteria floor near the waste barrels was wet with milk from breakfast.  The textured ceiling in the cafeteria was in a deplorable state with areas where the textured material was entirely missing and others where the material hung perilously over the tables.  The cafeteria was spotless, and the custodian was busy cleaning the ceilingheight window sills.  The cafeteria ceiling had been repaired.  The girls restroom on the second floor landing lacked soap, was not accessible to the handicapped, had one sink with very low water pressure, and the toilet paper rolls were simply propped up rather than being placed on the roller.  The boys restroom on the second floor landing still had an odor problem, which has been chronic.  Bathrooms on the second floor were clean and free of odor. Additional findings:  A poster was on display that outlined the improvements Mitchell was to receive from the recently passed bond issue. The school is to undergo a large range of repairs and upgrades, which are budgeted at roughly $900,000. Some of the major repairs are to begin in summer 2000.  The kitchen area was crowded with large food storage units which impeded traffic flow.  Although the cafeteria was in need of repair, the principal was not sure whether remodeling the dining area was included on Mitchells list of improvements.Dunbar Magnet Middle School Fall 1999: Selected Areas of Concern Spring 2000 Findings  No flags were flying from the flagpole in front of the school.  The front of the building, which was the only entrance with unlocked doors, was not wheelchair accessible.  The bed of plants at the main entrance needed weeding.  Security officers were not immediately visible during our visit.  Walkways near the Wright Avenue side of the campus were broken and hazardous, and others were overgrown with grass.  A pile of broken and discarded furniture sat outside the band room.  The non-slip covers on the stair treads and risers were broken in many places, and thus unsightly as well as hazardous.  The large, glass-enclosed exhibit cabinet in the east foyer (which in previous years had held vibrant displays related to the school theme) was completely empty, and the small bulletin board in the west foyer was blank.  The clock suspended by the main office did not tell the correct time by several hours.  A locker door on the first floor was missing, and numerous lockers throughout the school were defaced with black smudges and marks.  A window in the bank of interior hall windows on room 201 was broken. Most of the small, interior hall windows throughout the building were dusty and smudged, if not outright filthy.  Fire extinguisher cases in the corridors were empty, and no fire extinguisher was visible in the cafeteria.  Several walls and classroom doors were defaced with graffiti and marred by extraneous dirt.  The veneer on some classroom doors was split or missing in pieces.  The media center carpet was stained, frayed, and soiled.  None of the items we listed in the findings from our fall visit had been addressed. No one had even bothered to remove the jagged, broken window pane from the interior hall window.Dunbar School Page 2  A large area of ceiling panel was missing outside of the cafeteria.  Several floor tiles and ceiling tiles in the cafeteria were broken, cracked, or gouged.  Windows in the cafeteria were filthy.  Some floors were neither clear nor waxed\nothers were waxed, but the wax had been applied over dirt or, in the case of the cafeteria, dark, ugly scuff marks.  The kitchen tile around two large floor drains was cracked and broken.  Carts and containers created traffic flow problems in the food preparation and serving areas.  Sanitation problems in the kitchen included a missing ceiling vent cover and evidence of rodents.  Due to a lack of ventilation in the kitchens laundry room, the walls were covered with mildew and stains.  The identifying signs were missing from the girls restrooms located on the second and third floors.  A strong sewer smell emanated from the girls locker room.  Shower stalls in the girls locker room were corroded, stained, filled with trash, and covered with graffiti, as were the lockers, walls, and many other surface areas. The locker room looked like a garbage dump.  The girls locker room was not handicapped accessible.  The boys locker room contained huge swaths of material hanging from over half of the ceiling and a vertical crack, approximately 'A\" wide, reached down an entire wall. Other structural cracks were noted in other parts of the locker room.  Shower stalls in the boys locker room were so stained and corroded that they were unusable.  Graffiti was rampant in the boys locker room and the facility contained no soap or paper products.Dunbar School Page 3  A staff person reported leaks in an area above the gymnasium floor. Additional findings:  A sign had been placed in front of the school to congratulate the schools winning Math Counts team.  A flower bed near the entrance was planted with pansies.  Students were roaming the halls freely without any adult supervision during class time.  Some classroom doors were propped open rather than being secured as required by LRSD security regulations.  The sidewalk leading from the main parking lot to the front door was scattered with sharp gray stones, which had been used as a ground cover under a tree and formed a tripping hazard.  One of the main electrical circuit boxes was unlocked, and the door was open, providing great temptation for any one of the numerous roaming students.  Classroom doors lacked identifying signs\nrather the room numbers were written directly on each wooden door in a shoddylooking fashion.  The clock in the upstairs hall was still on Central Standard Time rather than Daylight Savings Time.  An unused display case in the third floor hall was a filthy eyesore.  A large section of wooden molding was missing from the area outside Room 302.Mann Magnet Middle School Fall 1999: Selected Areas of Concern Spring 2000 Findings  Although a covered walkway extended from the main building to the auxiliary building, the walkway was not wheelchair accessible.  Handicap accessibility continues to be a deficiency.  Parts of the campus were littered and unkempt.  The exterior masonry walls were seriously cracked in several places.  The plexiglass windows at the auditoriums entrance were scratched, ugly, and barely transparent.  None of the three girls restrooms located in the main building or in the auxiliary building were handicapped accessible.  The campus was almost litter free.  The structural deficits in the building were unchanged from a previous visit.  The badly-marred plexiglass windows at the auditorium entrance had been covered with paper to make them less unsightly than previously.  No change.  Water pressure was extremely low in the girls restrooms.  Several stalls in a girls restroom had no toilet paper, and three of the four restrooms had no paper towels.  Two girls restrooms were missing stall doors.  Although all of the light fixtures in the entry to the girls restrooms had bulbs, none of them were operating. When queried, a custodian remarked, Those lights are not necessary.  Two boys restrooms were locked. Two others should have been: each was smelly, only partly functional, and had no soap or paper products.  Though clean and supplied with paper, restrooms were still unsightly. Additional findings:  The murals overlooking the exterior courtyards were attractive and gave the school an academic aura.Hall High School Fall 1999: Selected Areas of Concern Spring 2000 Findings  No flags were flying from the schools flagpole.  Both the state and national flags were flying from the pole on the east side of the building.  One security guard was observed with his arm around a female student, and a police officer was seated alone in a parked squad car with a female student. Security personnel and resource officers should exercise great care in their interaction with students and the appearance of their behavior.  The ceiling tiles in the 700 building were sagging and broken.  A water leak over the kitchens vent-a- hood created a safety hazard.  Narrow food preparation lanes, coupled with loose and broken floor tiles, created safety hazards.  Flaking ceiling material over the serving counter created a health hazard.  One floor drain was stopped up, another drained slowly, and a stool covered a large open drain in the food preparation area, causing a safety hazard.  The kitchen door contained a large hole and one window pane was cracked.  A section of floor tile was missing from around the sink in the kitchen.  Cafeteria workers reported electrical overload problems and evidence of rodents.  None of the girls restrooms inspected was handicapped accessible.  One girls restroom lacked soap and not all stalls had toilet paper.  Security staff were visible throughout the campus.  No change.  No change.  No change.  No change.  No change.  No change.  No change.  The electrical problem in the kitchen had been resolved.  No change  The girls restroom near the media center had two stalls with no toilet paper holders.Hall High School Page Two  The stall dividers in one girls restroom were covered with graffiti.  The graffiti had been painted over, but the white paint did not match the beige walls and stalls. Additional findings:  The school featured a variety of attractive displays appropriate to a high school setting.  Students and staff members were friendly.  During our visit, the seniors were involved in taking semester tests, and the halls were quiet and students were in their classrooms.  Signs throughout the school welcomed students in a variety of languages and celebrated the schools diversity of population, marking it as a true welcome center.  The exterior was generally neat, but we noticed a small amount of litter.  The kitchen area included a number of problems: the floors were sweating and slippery because the air conditioning was not in use\nthe filter on the deep flyer was inoperative and the staff had to manually lift and empty the hot grease\na metal plate protruded from the floor in the doorway to the serving area.\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1508","title":"Testing: Reading and language comparative data, 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":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1999/2001"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Standards","Educational statistics","School management and organization","School integration","Students"],"dcterms_title":["Testing: Reading and language comparative data, 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/1508"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["60 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47814","title":"Touched by an Angel footage, April 1999 [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999"],"dcterms_description":["Title from item."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of: Visual Materials from the Rosa Parks Papers (Library of Congress)."],"dcterms_subject":["African American police","Youth"],"dcterms_title":["Touched by an Angel footage, April 1999 [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.47814"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Use digital image. Original served only by appointment because material requires special handling. For more information, see (http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/info/617_apptonly.html)","Publication may be restricted. For general information see \"Visual Materials from the Rosa Parks Papers...,\" (http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/res/689_park.html)"],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1990-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_689","title":"Transition report guidelines","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1999"],"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","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Transition report guidelines"],"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/689"],"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\nLRSD 1999 Transition Report Areas Assigned to Associates School Construction - Melissa Alternative Education - Margie Equitable Allocation of Resources - Skip Extracurricular \u0026amp; Enrichment Activities - Horace Student Participation - Horace Incentive Schools - Melissa Learning Environment - Horace Magnet Schools - Gene Mathematics - Melissa Staffing - Horace Middle School Conversion - Margie Policy Compliance - Gene Program Assessment - Gene Reading and Language Arts - Horace Remediation - Gene Student Assignment - Gene/Melissa Student Discipline - Margieid, ' ti - a Guidelines for LRSD Transition Report March 3, 1999 Condense and paraphrase the language of the provisions, preserving the key words and eliminating extraneous language thats not pertinent to the findings that will follow (e.g., a plan reference to a certain ODM report). Provisions should not be quotations from the plan. Avoid the use of shall or and or\nwrite 40%, not forty percent. Organize the provisions in any way that helps you present your findings most logically and clearly. For example, you can break the provisions into segments and immediately follow that segment with the relative findings. Or, consolidate certain provisions into a related cluster that forms the basis for broader findings. Place the provisions flush with the left margin, and double the space between them. Reference the plan provision at the end of each one. For example: Implement a policy of promotion within. (Pg. 342.2.5.) E, when paraphrasing, you combine two provisions, use a semicolon between the references. Write a short paragraph of introduction to the findings (or make the first paragraph introductory or background in nature) to help set the stage for what follows and thus help readers get their bearings. Findings should be written in narrative, not outline, form. Eliminate bullets except for short lists of items. Make sure that all aspects of any provision or part of a provision are covered in the findings, and, when appropriate, note the source of the information. If a person is the source, state the position of the person instead of the name. If the source of the information is your own experience as a member of a work group, say so. When applicable, you must reference the mid-year report in your findings. Differentiate the factual findings from your own opinions, hopes, or desires and put them in the appropriate sections. Findings are to consist only of information gleaned from interviews, document review, observations, etc. Relegate your opinions, exhortations, worries, etc. to the Conclusions or Recommendations as appropriate. Dont assume that readers know more than you tell them. While our intention is to hit the high points, be sure to include enough information to paint a clear, complete picture. Dont risk sacrificing understanding for brevity. When in doubt, fill it out. Avoid introducing new information into the summaries that doesnt appear in the findings. If you use examples in the summary, make sure the examples are used in the findings. Since many of the findings are brief, the corresponding summaries will be similarly short, containing just the main points. Since they are probably the only thing many of our audience will read, the summaries must contain a condensation of the most important findings in concise language.Include a budget component or reference everywhere it could possibly be relevant. For example, budget implications are inherent in training costs, new positions, new programs, etc. What corresponding budget provisions has the district made, plans to make, has yet to make, or failed to make? Diversify language to help retain reader interest and avoid overusing certain phrases and words, especially provide, regarding, and according to. Begin each recommendation with an action verb.Date: March 19, 1999 To: All Associates From\nRe: Team edit Attached are some of the draft reports on the LRSD transition. They are ready to to through the team editing process. Polly would have distributed them yesterday, but we know why she didnt. Im aware of the schedule and deadlines on your remaining reports, and the team edit doesnt supplant that schedule. Do the editing at those times that youre not able to make headway on your remaining reports (waiting on futher interviews, information, etc.) With Polly out sick, bad bugs threatening the health of us all, and the D .C. trip imminent, please make good use of your time and fold the editing into your day as you can. i3 4 Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT RECEV-O August 24, 1999 AUG 2  'iSa OFRCtCr DESEGREGATION MONITORING Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 E. Markham - Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown\nThe August 11** Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) report examining LRSD preparation to implement our Revised Desegregation and Education Plan provides a solid barometer of reference as we enter the 99-2000 school year. In keeping with LRSD plan commitment, careful consideration and review of this report document has been enacted in each division! department area, addressing preparation activities toward compliance and provisions of the revised plan. In an attempt to offer additional information that may not have been available at the time of report findings, the following is provided\n Overall Alternative Education Program seats for '99-2000 are being expanded. Greater student opportunity and success has been recorded for the 98-99 school year, resulting in increased student! school retention and reduced suspension ! dropout numbers. Periodic assessment of performance indicators will be monitored toward necessary program adjustment and/or revision.  Revised School Profile Report documentation is being compiled. Expanded information is to include Equitable Allocation of Resource equity indicators and participation data for all extracurricular and AR Activities Association (AAA) sanctioned activities.  The LRSD Talent Development Committee will explore potential funding sources for AVID and/or programs unique to LRSD. especially for the high schools. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 824-2000 4 August 24, 1999 Page 2  A training of trainers model to deliver cultural sensitivity training is being established. Dr. Terrence Roberts will help in reviewing training on prejudice reduction and cultural sensitivity.  Determination for future utilization of Garland and Mitchell Elementary Schools is one of the 99-2000 LRSD priorities.  Approved funding sources for new Stephens Elementary School Construction have been determined (03/11/99 board action).  Long term expenditure projections for Stephens Elementary have been developed.  Possible location, funding and construction of the new west LR school is one of the 99-2000 priorities. An immediate timeline has been established. At present, the school is not anticipated to be built prior to the 2000-2001 school year after LRSD issues a 3/15/01 report indicating the state of compliance with the revised plan.  Personnel Recruitment goals and procedures are being enacted where African- Americans are under represented. * ombudsman role clarification was provided in the 8/05/99 Principals Nuts and Bolts inservice session. Training activities are being scheduled. After more than a year of intense planning and training, numerous changes and program initiatives have been put in place as we now enter this 99-2000 school year. Recognizing that substantial efforts must be provided toward obligations set forth in the revised plan, it constitutes a work in progress. The Office of Desegregation Monitoring serves as an important resource whose expertise, insight and direction is appreciated and continually sought. Sincerely, .e^e V. amine Superintendent of SchoolsDate: August 26, 199 To: All Associates From: Re: .espouse from Gamine Attached is a copy of the letter I received from Les Gamine yesterday. As you will see, he purports to be adding information to our transition report that may not have been available at the time of report findings. Please find those points in the letter that were covered (or not) in the section of the report you wrote. Then write me a brief note telling me your comments on Dr. Gamines point. For example, he says that funding sources for Stephens were determined in the March 1999 board meeting\nhe asserts that the role of the ombudsman was clarified in early August. Do you agree' If so, is this what the report said? Who at the LRSD reviewed that finding? Did he or she agree or disagree with the way we handled that information? And so on. I may respond to Les to emphasize that his staff read our findings and had the chance to correct or update them. Your comments will help me decide how much to say to him. Thanks very much. Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 September 9, 1999 Dr. Les Carnine, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Les: Thank you for your recent letter in response to our August 1999 report on the districts preparations for this school year. Im glad to hear that you and your staff have read the document, and we hope you have found it helpful. I appreciate the additional information that you provided in your letter. As for your speculation that the information may not have been available at the time of our research, I want to emphasize what our reports introduction notes: LRSD staff members who had contributed to our research (either through direct interviews or by providing documentation) received the rough draft of our findings a few days before our report was finalized and published. On August 3 we hand delivered the drafts, invited your staff to offer corrections or updated information, and picked up their written comments on August 5. We reviewed those comments, made appropriate changes in the report, and then filed the completed document less than a week later on August 11. This advance review of our findings is designed to assure the accuracy and completeness of our reports. How successfully we reach that goal depends in great part on the accuracy and completeness of the information upon which we base our reports. I believe that we afforded your staff a fair opportunity to help us get this report right. Sincerely yours, ------- Ann S. Browni S rL To: From: Subj: Ann Brown and ODM Staff Bonnie Lesley Report on LRSD Transition Activities Date: August 4, 1999 RECEIVED AUG 5 1999 omcEOh DESEGREGATION MONITORIMa The following are my comments in response to the draft document that you sent to my office on the afternoon of August 3. Program Assessment I think the findings on this section are far too nanow to reflect the work that occurred during 1998-99. We understand, of course, that it is very difficult to gather enough information to have a complete picture of a years worth of work in only a few interviews. Our staff looked, for instance, at the performance of every elementary school and the district as a whole as a part of the process of making the necessary changes in Reading and Language Arts that were other obligations in the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. We concluded, of course, that a big part of the problem (the problem being defined as only about 30 percent of the students are performing at the proficient level or above) was that LRSD really didnt have a reading/language arts program, that individual teachers and individual schools were making decisions based on their best information on curriculum and instruction. Part of our program evaluation was hearing from teacher after teacher and principal after principal that a big problem in the district was lack of consistency in the language arts program. This lack of focus and alignment with the state curriculum framework handicapped all students who were mobile, but especially African American children who are more likely to come from poverty in this community. Our assessment of current practice also revealed: * * * * * * * * lack of in-depth professional development for teachers too many pull-outs and other distractions from the language arts block insufficient time allotted to teach the language arts as many as twelve different phonics programs school practices such as silent cafeterias that discouraged the social use of language no written guidance for teachers on the curriculum standards and benchmarks a proliferation of programs without a clear focus of what they were supposed to achieve no congruence between Title I programs and the regular curriculum/ instruction program. Our program evaluation resulted in clear conclusions that what we were doing was not working, especially for African American children. The District plan that we constructed was totally research-based and is reflected in the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan that was provided to ODM staff. We tried to model in this process and in our written plan the process of using data for decision-making, of using research to shape program design, of aligning programs with state frameworks and assessments, of constructing systemic designs, not just tinkering at the edges, and planning ahead for assessment and program evaluation. We are very proud of the fact that our PreK-3 plan included strategies for restructuring Title I programs, for instance, not just the regular program.We have since your last interviews established the formal program evaluation agenda for 1999-2000, and it will go to the board in August: 1. PreK-3 Literacy Program 2. ESL 3. Middle School Transition 4. National Science Foundation Project To the extent possible, data will be collected and analyzed relating to other programs, but our plan is to create an evaluation cycle so that over five years we can at least provide data for decision-making on the core programs. We also intend to require that all future grant proposals include a set-aside budget to fund the evaluation activities so that our district staff do not get consumed doing grant-funded evaluations and never get to the core programs of the district.Reading and Language Arts I have several corrections to make in this report. 1st paragraph: Our staff development this year in reading and language arts focused on the following: * * * * * * * * * * * * Implementation of Smart Start, the states initiative. We attended the ADE conferences, used their materials and videotapes with faculties, trained central staff and principals, etc. We obtained a state waiver to provide three restructuring days at the end of the 1998-99 school year for training to prepare for implementation of new programs in fall 1999. Elementary teachers focused on ELLA and Effective Literacy topics\nmiddle school teachers focused on transition issues\nand high school teachers focused on strategies for teaching in the block. Began training a cadre of school-level literacy coaches in ELLA (Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas)~the professional development that provides teachers with training on research on teaching reading and specific strategies that are effective in teaching all children how to read. More than 100 primary-level teachers have received the first level of ELLA training (prior to starting school in August). Others will be trained at the basic level by November 1. We sent several staff members to the training of trainers for Effective Literacythe professional development for grades 3-5 teachers. This training will be provided to District teachers as quickly as possible in fall 1999. Approximately 40 grade 4 teachers attended a one-week workshop in July on reading/writing connections-specific strategies to help students perform well on the state grade 4 benchmark examination. Approximately 40 grades 6-8 teachers attended a one-week workshop in July to prepare them to teach the new Reading and Writing Workshop. On July 23 we provided a full-day of training for principals on the new curriculum/instruction/assessment programs to be implemented in fall 1999. One session for elementary principals gave them an overview of the new ELLA program and what to expect when observing teachers. We have provided several books to each elementary school on various aspects of developing high levels of literacy among primaryage children. School staffs are encouraged to establish study groups to read and discuss these materials and make decisions on ways that the ideas ctm be incorporated into their lessons. On August 9-10-11 the grades 6-8 teachers will meet with Linda Rief, author of a book called Seeking Diversity on how to implement the Reading and Writing Workshop. On August 16-17 the kindergarten teachers will receive training in the implementation of the new phonemic awareness program. Animated Literacy. On August 12, 13, and 16, high school English teachers will experience three days of training on the reading and writing connections appropriate for adolescent students. A special emphasis will be on preparing students for the end-of-level Literacy Examination in April of grade 11.* During August Preschool Inservice, elementary teachers will again focus on ELLA and Effective Literacy topics, middle school teachers on middle school transition and instructional strategies, and high school teachers on discipline-specific strategies aligned with the newly published secondary curriculum standards and benchmarks. Last paragraph on page 2 under Findings. We didnt really present to the Board a policy. We presented to the Board for their review the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan, which serves as administrative regulations on the structuring of the school day. We have a draft of formal administrative regulations for elementary, middle, and high schools, but these drafts are not yet quite ready for board review. A major accomplishment during 1998-99 was the development of a curriculum map for each of the four curriculum areas. These maps include the alignment of district grade-level and course benchmarks with the state curriculum frameworks, the SAT9, and with adopted textbook materials. Teachers have in one document for each grade level all this information. ACSIP (the new name for Arkansas accreditation) requires teacher-level curriculum maps, so all the Little Rock teachers will have to do is align their lesson plans with the district documents. Also, at the beginning of the 1998-99 school year all we had was K-5 standards. Now we have K-12 standards and grade-level and core course benchmarks. Elementary teachers received their documents during the June 2-3-4 inservice, and secondary teachers will receive theirs on August 16. The report does not mention all the work we have done this year to restructure the middle school language arts programs. Regular-level students will take a two-period block called the Reading and Writing Workshop. We will begin implementation in fall 1999 of the Nanci Atwell model. Teachers will need considerably more training than the one week we could provide before school started to be able fully to implement the model, so realistically we will be phasing in this new approach to teaching language arts. Students at the Pre-AP level will have the same course, but in a one-period block. There is an optional second-hour courses called Research and Writing, which some middle schools have encouraged all Pre-AP students to take. In addition, some new language arts electives have been added to the middle level: * * * Expressions! (a speech/drama course available at all three grade levels)\nWrite On! (a journalism course available at grades 7-8) TV Writing and Production (available at grade 8) On our plate for 1999-2000 will be the restructuring of the high school language arts programs, including a new curriculum for the required Communications I course.Another major effort to improve literacy has been in the restructuring of our PreK-12 ESL program for fall 1999. Some of our actions were also in process when we under-went a compliance review from OCR in March. In fall 1999 we will implement the following changes: * * * * *  * * Begin serving PreK children in the ESL program. Added ten teachers to the elementary Newcomer Centers so that class-size could be reduced in the classrooms serving ESL students. We used our allocation from the Class-size Reduction funds from the federal government to pay the teachers this year. Brady1 Chicot3 Romine2 Terry-2 Washington-2 Added Terry as a Newcomer Center since they expect approximately 40 ESL students in fall 1999. Added new ESL courses in the core curriculum at the middle and high school levels. A full-time ESL coordinator will be employed in August to oversee the program. We have budgeted funds for a big emphasis on professional development for all teachers teaching ESL children, including a tuition-reimbursement program so that teachers can secure their ESL endorsement. Program procedures will be developed where necessary, formalized, training provided on implementation, and processes to monitored to ensure compliance with OCR guidelines. Funds have been budgeted to provide translations of critical documents into the languages of parents. Note also that the District CRTs that were administered in 1998-99 also included reading. Our assessment plan for 1999-2000 includes these changes: * * * the addition of a kindergarten literacy test, especially to test phonemic awareness, since that knowledge is the best predictor of a students learning to read in grade 1 the addition of a grade 1 literacy test the administration of new District-adopted CRTs for grades 2-11 in reading/ writing literacy and mathematics. These tests will be administered each quarter so that teachers can quickly identify students who need remediation and so that teaching strategies can be adjusted to ensure more success. I did not find mentioned anywhere in your report the work we did to enhance graduation requirements. These new standards are important in understanding the overall plan for improvement. The new expectations are outlined in the curriculum catalog, which we provided you, but please call if you need more information. Successful School Restructuring by Fred Newmann and Gary Wehlage says that one of the most important things a high school can do to improve achievement is to expose all students to a rigorous common core. That was our intent in designing the new graduation requirements.Mathematics Page 2the paragraph on math specialists: We have funded additional mathematics specialists to support the implementation of the new mathematics curricula in the following ways: * * Two specialists were funded from the professional development portion of the Class-size Reduction funds provided by the federal government\nOne specialist was funded from Title VI\nSee Dennis Glasgows responses for other details. I was not able to spend time with him today to get the details that I needed, but I know that he is going to have more assistance in 1999-2000 to accelerate the implementation, to provide classroom coaching, and to provide follow-up training for teachers who need it. Again, our regulations on the school day are drafted, but have not yet been presented to the board. The District CRTs that we administered in mathematics in 1998-99 were also administered in reading.Middle Schcxjl Transition See Linda Young Austins report on the training provided to schools during June 2-3-4, during the June Middle School Academy, and during the August Preschool Inservice.Student Participation Second paragraph under Findings\nActually, we do NOT plan to implement AVID in 1999-2000unless the GEAR Up grant is funded for the four targeted middle schools. Third paragraph: We will in spring 2000 make another attempt at the Javits grant to fund high school programs. If the funds were made available this year by the Department of Education, never saw the announcement or the RFP. we We have done much on this obligation without any funding beyond the NSF money, and we^Imow already that enrollment in upper-level courses will improve considerably in fall * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Associate Superintendent met with teachers and counselors in each school to discuss the obligations in the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and the NSF project, to hear from teachers what they need for support, and to plan strategies for enrolling more students for fall 1999. We re made accessible a great deal of training for teachers of Pre-AP and AP courses-in curriculum, instruction, vertical teaming, and strategies to ensure more student success. We have a new board policy on Pre-AP and AP courses and on the GT program. The High School Curriculum Catalog includes a section on the importance of these obligations and encourages the schools to ensure higher levels of enrollment. Each high school principal and each middle and high school counselor received training on this information. Some of the high schools have scheduled a tutoring period to support student success in 1999-2000. We have published this years enrollment data, and Vanessa Cleaver has met with staff at each school to make them aware of their cunent enrollment and to work with them on increasing enrollment in upper-level science and math courses. We added an AP English III courses to the curriculum for 1999-2000, so now students can take two AP English courses. We added a regular-level Calculus course to encourage a broader group of students to enroll in Calculus, not just AP Calculus. The addition of the University Studies program at Hall High has added new opportunities for enrollment in advanced courses and to earn college credit while in high school. Our new Quality Indicators in our accountability plan include a performance standard on Enrollment of Students in Pre-AP or AP Courses. This standard will apply to both middle and high schools. Another Quality Indicator measures the percent of students who complete Algebra I by grade 8. In order for students to have time in their schedule to take Calculus in high school, they need to take Algebra I in grade 8. Our new graduation requirements include Physics I, Biology I, Chemistry I, Algebra I-II, and Geometry for every student. These courses are essential to prepare students for upper-level mathematics and science courses. Our new elementary literacy and mathematics programs have also been designed with the importance in mind of preparing many more students well for the Pre-AP and AP courses.We, of course, would love to implement AVID because we think it would be ideal to address our students needs, but there is much we can do without AVID, and we are examining other program options, such as those promoted by the College Board, writing a local program design, and forming more partnerships with the universities in the area. One restructuring model that we have looked at is the Talent Development Schools promoted by Johns Hopkins University. Some of these schools are operational in Baltimore and other eastern cities, and we think there may be some interest in this model in Little Rock.Remediation Second paragraph under Findings: I remember our discussion on this, and I remember telling the team about my experience in Waco where students were ability grouped: basic, regular, advanced. Little Rock did not have those three levels-to my knowledge. The curriculum included regular-level courses. plus a variety of courses labeled gifted/talented, 99 honors, enriched, advanced, and AP. The staff was vague at all levels on how these different labels distinguished instruction, so we made the decision to have only two levels of courses at the secondary schools: regular and either Pre-AP or AP. 99 tf What I think I said was that it is apparent that the only students being exposed to the tested curriculum in many schools are those taking the Pre-AP or AP courses. Teachers tell me that in too many cases the regular level courses are rather consistently taught below-level, and the Pre-AP courses rarely go beyond what we would consider grade-level. That is why standards and grade-level benchmarks are so important, and that is why the frequent assessment of student performance through the District CRTs is so important. We have got to know whether we are teaching the tested curriculum, and we have got to know early if individual students need remediation. We do have a draft policy and regulation on the elimination of racial disparities with clear procedures laid out. Those documents will probably move forward to the Board in the next month or two. Title 1 There are big changes in Title 1 for fall 1999. All elementary schools, except the magnet schools, will be Title 1 schools in 1999-2000, including Terry. Elementary schools will receive approximately $450 per eligible student in 1999-2000, but since the schools are smaller with the movement of grade 6 to the middle schools, some schools will receive less funding in 1999-2000 than in previous years. Since a great majority of Title 1 schools failed to meet their improvement goals last year, they were identified for improvement. One of the mandates when a school is identified is that they can no longer do what they were doing. They have to construct a plan that has a better (research-based) chance of ensuring the academic success of increasing numbers of students. We have worked hard on that. Please dont forget that Success for All is the largest remedial program at the elementary level. We have that program in nine schools. Another school, Washington, uses Direct Instruction, as its intervention. Cloverdale Middle School and Southwest Middle School will receive extensive funding since they each are anticipated to have more than 75% poverty. The other five middle schools (excluding Mann since it is a magnet) will collaborate in using their funding to insure the successful implementation of the Reading and Writing Workshop and to provide teachers with strategies for ensuring more student success. All three middle school grades will be assessed: grades 6 and 8 with the state benchmark exams and grade 7 with the SAT9. Pulaski Heights will pilot in 1999-2000 a new remedial reading program based on the Shriner dyslexia strategies, and Mablevale will pilot Project Read. We will study these two approaches to determine whether we should advocate wider implementation of either or both. We are also looking at a new program for secondary students called Read Right, but we dont have much information on it as yet.The district hosted during the week of July 26 two different Institutes for the principals and Campus Leadership Teams from each school. A big part of the training emphasized the imperative to improve student achievement. Schools will now submit one School Improvement Plan that will satisfy the requirements of the district, of Title I, and of ACSIP (accreditation). Each participant received a training notebook and a copy of the Handbook for Campus Leadership Teams, which included a copy of ACTAAP (state accountability system) and the districts new system for Collective Responsibility. A new publication. Guidelines for School Improvement Planning, will be published the week of August 2 for the schools to use. An important remediation program in the district is summer school. We served more district students this year since the policy was changed to not admit out-of-district students until all district students were guaranteed access. (Sadie Mitchell has the reports on this summers programs.) We also developed a model for an after-school Reading Clinic for elementary and middle school students (recommended in the PreK-3 Literacy Plan as an appropriate intervention). Another important remediation program is the new ACC program-Accelerated Learning Center-for high school students who are overage and credit-deficient. This program graduated many students in 1998-99 who probably would not have graduated otherwise, enabled many more to earn GED certificates, and served more than 200 in the summer school program. A third ongoing remediation program is the evening high school. I know that you are familiar with it. Each schools School Improvement Plan will include a series of interventions under 3-5 priority areas. The schools have been instructed to include among their priorities the improvement of achievement in reading/writing literacy and the improvement of achievement in mathematics. The interventions under each of these areas will be the strategies that the school will design to remediate student achievement so that the school achieves its mandated improvement goals. (FII attach to this a copy of our draft document on how they are to do this for your information.) These sets of interventions will be school-level remedial programs, for the most part. Youll find the step on designing interventions to be helpful to this report, I think. Arkansas needs to fund compensatory education. Otherwise, we dont see a consistent source of revenue to fund the kinds of remedial program, K-12, that are needed for the diversity of students that we serve. The new Poverty Index funds are a start in this direction, but not all schools have access to these dollars.In General There is much more to tell-all aligned and coherent with the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. We had 51 priorities in our Divisions work plan last year, and we achieved 49 of them, plus several others that we didnt know would be on our plate. The nature of education is that there is always so much more to do than we have time and resources to accomplish, but we feel that we made giant steps forward in 1998- 99. Our major focus in 1999-2000 is to ensure as much success in implementation as possible. We are so confident in the quality of our designs and in our professional development programs that we know that we will see some improvement in our test scores this year. Thanks for giving us an opportunity to react. If I can answer further questions or provide copies of other documents, please dont hesitate to ask.To: From: Subj: Ann Brown and ODM Staff Bonnie Lesley Report on LRSD Transition Activities Date: August 4, 1999 RECEIVED AUG 5 1999 OFFICE 01- DESEGREGATION MONITORIKG The following are my comments in response to the dral't document that you sent to my office on the afternoon of August 3. Program Assessment 1 think the findings on this section are far too narrow to reflect the work that occurred during 1998-99. We understand, of course, that it is very difficult to gather enough information to have a complete picture of a years worth of work in only a few interviews. Our staff looked, for instance, at the performance of every elementary school and the district as a whole as a part of the process of making the necessary changes in Reading and Language Arts that were other obligations in the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. We concluded, of course, that a big part of the problem (the problem being defined as only about 30 percent of the students are performing at the proficient level or above) was that LRSD really didnt have a reading/language arts program, that individual teachers and individual schools were making decisions based on their best information on curriculum and instruction. Part of our program evaluation was heanng from teacher after teacher and principal after principal that a big problem in the district was lack of consistency in the language arts program. This lack of focus and alignment with the state curriculum framework handicapped all students who were mobile, but especially African American children who are more likely to come from poverty in this community. Our assessment of current practice also revealed * * * * * * * * lack of in-depth professional development for teachers too many pull-outs and other distractions from the language arts block insufficient time allotted to teach the language arts as many as twelve different phonics programs school practices such as silent cafeterias that discouraged the social use of language no written guidance for teachers on the curriculum standards and benchmarks a proliferation of programs without a clear focus of what they were supposed to achieve no congruence between Title I programs and the regular curriculum/ instruction program. Our program evaluation resulted in clear conclusions that what we were doing was not working, especially for African American children. The District plan that we constructed was totally research-based and is reflected in the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan that was provided to ODM staff. We tried to model in this process and in our written plan the process of using data for decision-making, of using research to shape program design, of aligning programs with state frameworks and assessments, of constructing systemic designs, not just tinkering at the edges, and planning ahead for assessment and program evaluation. We are very proud of the fact that our PreK-3 plan included strategies for restructuring Title I programs, for instance, not just the regular program.We have since your last interviews established the formal program evaluation agenda for 1999-2000, and it will go to the board in August: 1. PreK-3 Li teracv Program 2. ESL 3. Middle School Transition 4. National Science Foundation Project To the extent possible, data will be collected and analyzed relating to other programs, but our plan is to create an evaluation cycle so that over five years we can at least provide data for decision-making on the core programs. We also intend to require that all future grant proposals include a set-aside budget to fund the evaluation activities so that our district staff do not get consumed doing grant-funded evaluations and never get to the core programs of the district.Reading and Language Arts I have several corrections to make in this report. 1st paragraph: Our staff development this year in reading and language arts focused on the following: * * * * * * * * * * * * Implementation of Smart Start, the states initiative. We attended the ADE conferences, used their materials and videotapes with faculties, trained central staff and principals, etc. We obtained a state waiver to provide three restructuring days at the end of the 1998-99 school year for training to prepare for implementation of new programs in fall 1999. Elemental^ teachers focused on ELLA and Effective Literacy topics\nmiddle school teachers focused on transition issues\nand high school teachers focused on strategies for teaching in the block. Began training a cadre of school-level literacy coaches in ELLA (Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas)-the professional development that provides teachers with training on research on teaching reading and specific strategies that are effecti\\ e in teaching all children how to read. More than KX) primary-level teachers have received the first level of ELLA training (prior to starting school in August). Others will be trained at the basic level by November 1. We sent several staff members to the training of trainers for Effective Literacy-the professional development for grades 3-5 teachers. This training will be provided to District teachers as quickly as possible in fall 1999. Approximately 40 grade 4 teachers attended a one-week workshop in July on reading/writing connections-specific strategies to help students perform well on the state grade 4 benchmark examination. Approximately 40 grades 6-8 teachers attended a one-week workshop in July to prepare them to teach the new Reading and Writing Workshop. On July 23 we provided a full-day of training for principals on the new curriculum/instruction/assessment programs to be implemented in fall 1999. One session for elementary principals gave them an overview of the new ELLA program and what to expect when observing teachers. We have provided several books to each elementary school on various aspects of developing high levels of literacy among primaryage children. School staffs are encouraged to establish study groups to read and discuss these materials and make decisions on ways that the ideas can be incorporated into their lessons. On August 9-10-11 the grades 6-8 teachers will meet with Linda Rief, author of a book called Seeking Diversity on how to implement the Reading and Writing Workshop. On August 16-17 the londergarten teachers will receive training in the implementation of the new phonemic awareness program. Animated Literacy. On August 12, 13, and 16, high school English teachers will experience three days of training on the reading and writing connections appropriate for adolescent students. A special emphasis will be on preparing students for the end-of-level Literacy Examination in April of grade 11.* During August Preschool Inservice, elementary' teachers will again focus on ELLA and Effective Literacy topics, middle school teachers on middle school transition and instructional strategies, and high school teachers on discipline-specific strategies aligned with the newly published secondary' curriculum standards and benchmarks. Last paragraph on page 2 under Findings. We didnt really present to the Board a policy. We presented to the Board for their review the PreK-3 Literacy Program Plan, which serves as administrative regulations on the structuring of the school day. We have a draft of formal administrative regulations for elementary, middle, and high schools, but these drafts are not yet quite ready for board review. A major accomplishment dunng 1998-99 was the development of a curriculum map for each of the four curriculum areas. These maps include the alignment of district grade-level and course benchmarks with the state curriculum frameworks, the SAT9, and with adopted te.xtbook materials. Teachers have in one document for each grade level all this information. ACSIP (the new name for Arkansas accreditation) requires teacher-level curriculum maps, so all the Little Rock teachers will have to do is align their lesson plans with the district documents. Also, at the beginning of the 1998-99 school year all we had was K-5 standards. Now we have K-12 standards and grade-level and core course benchmarks. Elementarv teachers received their documents during the June 2-3-4 inservice, and secondary teachers will receive theirs on August 16. The report does not mention all the work we have done this year to restructure the middle school language arts programs. Regular-level students will take a two-period block called the Reading and Writing Workshop. We will begin implementation in fall 1999 of the Nanci Atwell model. Teachers will need considerably more training than the one week we could provide before school started to be able fully to'implement the model, so realisticallv we will be phasing in this new approach to teaching language arts. Students at the Pre-AP level will have the same course, but in a one-period block. There is an optional second-hour courses called Research and Writing, which some middle schools have encouraged all Pre-AP students to take. In addition, some new language arts electives have been added to the middle level' *  * * Expressions! (a speech/drama course available at all three grade levels)\nWrite On! (a journalism course available at grades 7-8) TV Writing and Production (available at grade 8) On our plate for 1999-2(XX) will be the restructuring of the high school language arts programs, including a new curriculum for the required Communications I course.Another major effort to improve literacy has been in the restructuring of our PreK-12 ESL program for fall 1999. Some of our actions were also in process when we under-went a compliance review from OCR in March. In fall 1999 we will implement the following changes: * * * * * * * * Begin serving PreK children in the ESL program. Added ten teachers to the elementary' Newcomer Centers so that class-size could be reduced in the classrooms serving ESL students. We used our allocation from the Class-size Reduction funds from the federal government to pay the teachers this year. Brady-1 Chicot3 Romine-2 Terry-2 Washington-2 Added Terry as a Newcomer Center since they expect appro.ximately 40 ESL students in fall 1999. Added new ESL courses in the core curriculum at the middle and high school levels. A full-time ESL coordinator will be employed in August to o\\ ersee the program. We have budgeted funds for a big emphasis on professional development for all teachers teaching ESL children, including a tuition-reimbursement program so that teachers can secure their ESL endorsement. Program procedures will be developed where necessary', formalized, training provided on implementation, and processes to monitored to ensure compliance with OCR guidelines. Funds have been budgeted to provide translations of critical documents into the languages of parents. Note also that the District CRTs that were administered in 1998-99 also included reading. Our assessment plan for 1999-2CXX) includes these changes: * . . .. . - the addition of a kindergarten literacy test, especially to test phonemic * * awareness, since that knowledge is the best predictor of a students learning to read in grade 1 the addition of a grade 1 literacy test the administration of new District-adopted CRTs for grades 2-11 in reading/ writing literacy and mathematics. These tests will be administered each quarter so that teachers can quickly identify students who need remediation and so that teaching strategies can be adjusted to ensure more success. I did not find mentioned anywhere in your report the work we did to enhance graduation requirements. These new standards are important in understanding the overall plan for improvement. The new expectations are outlined in the curriculum catalog, which we provided you, but please call if you need more information. Successful School Restructuring by Fred Newmann and Gary Wehlage says that one of the most important things a high school can do to improve achievement is to expose all students to a rigorous common core. That was our intent in designing the new graduation requirements.Mathematics Page 2-the paragraph on math specialists: We have funded additional mathematics specialists to support the implementation of the new mathematics curricula in the following ways: * * Two specialists were funded from the professional development portion of the Class-size Reduction funds provided by the federal government\nOne specialist was funded from Title VI\nSee Dennis Glasgows responses for other details. 1 was not able to spend time with him today to get the details that 1 needed, but 1 know that he is going to have more assistance in 1999-2000 to accelerate the implementation, to provide classroom coaching, and to provide follow-up training for teachers who need it. Again, our regulations on the school day are drafted, but have not yet been presented to the board. The District CRTs that we administered in mathematics in 1998-99 were also administered in reading.Middle School Transition See Linda Young Austins report on the training provided to schools during June 2-3-4, during the June Middle School Academy, and during the August Preschool Inservice.Student Participation Second paragraph under Findings: Actually, we do NOT plan to implement AVID in 1999-2000unless the GEAR Up grant is funded for the four targeted middle schools. Third paragraph: We will in spring 2000 make another attempt at the Javits grant to fund high school programs. If the funds were made available this year by the Department of Education, we never saw the announcement or the RFP. We have done much on this obligation without any funding beyond the NSF money, and we know already that enrollment in upper-level courses will improve considerablv in fall 1999. * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Associate Superintendent met with teachers and counselors in each school to discuss the obligations in the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and the NSF project, to hear from teachers what they need for support, and to plan strategies for enrolling more students for fall 1999. We re made accessible a great deal of training for teachers of Pre-AP and AP courses-in curriculum, instruction, vertical teaming, and strategies to ensure more student success. We have a new board policy on Pre-AP and AP courses and on the GT program. The High School Curriculum Catalog includes a section on the importance of these obligations and encourages the schools to ensure higher levels of enrollment. Each high school principal and each middle and high school counselor received training on this information. Some of the high schools have scheduled a tutonng period to support student success in 1999-2(X)0. We have published this years enrollment data, and Vanessa Cleaver has met with staff at each school to make them aware of their current enrollment and to work with them on increasing enrollment in upper-le\\'el science and math courses. We added an AP English III courses to the curriculum for 1999-2000, so now students can take two AP English courses. We added a regular-level Calculus course to encourage a broader group of students to enroll in Calculus, not just AP Calculus. The addition of the University Studies program at Hall High has added new opportunities for enrollment in advanced courses and to earn college credit while in high school. Our new Quality Indicators in our accountability plan include a performance standard on Enrollment of Students in Pre-AP' or AP Courses. This standard will apply to both middle and high schools. Another Quality Indicator measures the percent of students who complete Algebra I by grade 8. In order for students to have time in their schedule to take Calculus in high school, they need to take Algebra I in grade 8. Our new graduation requirements include Physics I, Biology I, Chemistry I, Algebra I-Il, and Geometry for every student. These courses are essential to prepare students for upper-level mathematics and science courses. Our new elementary literacy and mathematics programs have also been designed with the importance in mind of preparing many more students well for the Pre-AP and AP courses.We, of course, would love to implement AVID because we think it would be ideal to address our students needs, but there is much we can do without AVID, and we are examining other program options, such as those promoted by the College Board, writing a local program design, and forming more partnerships with the universities in the area. One restructuring model that we have looked at is the Talent Development Schools promoted by Johns Hopkins University. Some of these schools are operational in Baltimore and other eastern cities, and we think there may be some interest in this model in Little Rock.Remediation Second paragraph under Findings: I remember our discussion on this, and 1 remember telling the team about my experience in Waco where students were ability grouped: basic, regular, advanced. Little Rock did not have those three levels-to my knowledge. The curriculum included regular-level courses. plus a variety of courses labeled gifted/talented, honors, enriched, advanced, and AP. The staff was vague at all levels on how these different labels distinguished instruction, so we made the decision to have only two levels of courses at the secondary schools: regular and either Pre-AP or AP. 'C What I think I said was that it is apparent that the only students being exposed to the tested curriculum in many schools are those taking the Pre-AP or AP courses. Teachers tell me that in too many cases the regular level courses are rather consistently taught below-level, and the Pre-AP courses rarely go beyond what we would consider grade-level. That is why standards and grade-level benchmarks are so important, and that is why the frequent assessment of student performance through the District CRTs is so important. We have got to know whether we are teaching the tested curriculum, and we have got to know early if individual students need remediation. We do have a draft policy and regulation on the elimination of racial disparities with clear procedures laid out. Those documents will probably move forward to the Board in the next month or two. Title I There are big changes in Title I for fall 1999. All elementary schools, except the magnet schools, will be Title I schools in 1999-2(X)0, including Terry. Elementary schools will receive approximately $450 per eligible student in 1999-2000, but since the schools are smaller with the movement of grade 6 to the middle schools, some schools will receive less funding in 1999-2000 than in previous years. Since a great majority of Title I schools failed to meet their improvement goals last year, they were identified for impro\\ ement. One of the mandates when a school is identified is that they can no longer do what they were doing. They have to construct a plan that has a better (research-based) chance of ensuring the academic success of increasing numbers of students. We have worked hard on that. Please dont forget that Success for All is the largest remedial program at the elementary level. We have that program in nine schools. Another school, Washington, uses Direct Instruction, as its intervention. Cloverdale Middle School and Southwest Middle School will receive extensive funding since they each are anticipated to have more than 75% poverty. The other five middle schools (excluding Mann since it is a magnet) will collaborate in using their funding to insure the successful implementation of the Reading and Writing Workshop and to provide teachers with strategies for ensuring more student success. All three middle school grades will be assessed: grades 6 and 8 with the state benchmark exams and grade 7 with the SAT9. Pulaski Heights will pilot in 1999-2000 a new remedial reading program based on the Shriner dyslexia strategies, and Mablevale will pilot Project Read. We will study these two approaches to determine whether we should advocate wider implementation of either or both. We are also looking at a new program for secondary' students called Read Right, but we dont have much information on it as yet.The district hosted during the week of July 26 two different Institutes for the principals and Campus Leadership Teams from each school. A big part of the training emphasized the imperative to improve student achievement. Schools will now submit one School Improvement Plan that will satisfy the requirements of the district, of Title I, and of ACSIP (accreditation). Each participant received a training notebook and a copy of the Handbook for Campus Leadership Teams, which included a copy of ACTAAP (state accountability system) and the districts new system for Collective Responsibility. A new publication. Guidelines for School Improvement Planning, will be published the week of August 2 for the schools to use. An important remediation program in the district is summer school. We served more district students this year since the policy was changed to not admit out-of-district students until all district students were guaranteed access. (Sadie Mitchell has the reports on this summers programs.) We also developed a model for an after-school Reading Clinic for elementary and middle school students (recommended in the PreK-3 Literacy Plan as an appropriate intervention). Another important remediation program is the new ACC program-Accelerated Learning Center-for high school students who are overage and credit-deficient. This program graduated many students in 1998-99 who probably would not have graduated otherwise, enabled many more to earn GED certificates, and served more than 200 in the summer school program. A third ongoing remediation program is the evening high school. I know that vou are familiar with it. Each schools School Improvement Plan will include a series of \"interventions under 3-5 priority areas. The schools have been instructed to include among their priorities the improvement of achievement in reading/writing literacy and the improvement of achievement in mathematics. The interventions under each of these areas will be the strategies that the school will design to remediate student achievement so that the school achieves its mandated improvement goals. (T11 attach to this a copy of our draft document on how they are to do this for your information.) These sets of interventions will be school-level remedial programs, for the most part. You 11 find the step on designing interventions to be helpful to this report, I think. Arkansas needs to fund compensatory education. Otherwise, we dont see a consistent source of revenue to fund the kinds of remedial program, K-12, that are needed for the diversity of students that we serve. The new Poverty Index funds are a start in this direction, but not all schools have access to these dollars.In General There is much more to tell-all aligned and coherent with the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. We had 51 pnorities in our Divisions work plan last year, and we achieved 49 of them, plus several others that we didnt know would be on our plate. The nature of education is that there is always so much more to do than we have time and resources to accomplish, but we feel that we made giant steps forward in 1998- 99. Our major focus in 1999-2000 is to ensure as much success in implementation as possible. We are so confident in the quality of our designs and in our professional development programs that we know that we will see some improvement in our test scores this year. Thanks for giving us an opportunity to react. If I can answer further questions or provide copies of other documents, please dont hesitate to ask.RECEIVED AUG 5 1999 Division of Instruction Work Teams 1999-2000 OFRCEOI- desegregation MONITORING The Division of Instruction will be organized in 1999-2000 into several multidisciplinary work teams to which the Work Plan Priorities will be assigned. The way we work will reflect Dr. Terrence Roberts fifth level of commitment, I will do whatever it takes to help schools help children learn. There will be essentially four kinds of teams: 1. 2. 3. 4. Existing departments. Current departments will continue to carry on some of their traditional assignments. For example, the Mathematics/Science Department will continue with their work of implementing the NSF project, as well as providing leadership in curriculum development, standards implementation, discipline-specific professional development, textbook adoptions, etc. The Department of Exceptional Children will continue with their current functions in running that program. Work Teams. Six new work teams will be established, three reporting directly to the Associate Superintendent and three reporting to the Assistant Superintendent of School Improvement. School-Level Teams. Three additional teams will be formed composed of elementary, middle, and high school experts to coordinate and articulate the curriculum and other programs and to provide more specific support to schools. Audit Teams. We are committed to conducting School Improvement Audits and Curriculum Audits for schools identified for improvement. (See Handbook for Campus Leadership Team, pp. 53-54, for definitions.) Everyone in the Division will be assigned from time to time to serve on these audit teams. Training will be provided in how to conduct an audit. In addition, everyone will continue to serve as brokers and as members of assigned Campus Leadership Teams. The Division will keep its former organizational structure for now, as will other District divisions. All staff will continue to occupy their current offices and reporting relationships. This team organization is transitional. In two to three years the Division will be reorganized, shifting more and more staff to roles more directly supportive of school improvement as the curriculum is better established and as instructional strategies are more institutionalized. The following teams shall be established directly under the Associate Superintendent for Instruction:PreK-12 Teaching and Learning Team (Team Leaders to be Assigned According to Tasks) Dennis Glasgow, Director of Mathematics and Science Vanessa Cleaver, Director of NSF Project Marie McNeal, Director of Social Studies TBN, Director of Secondary Language Arts Patricia Price, Director of Early Childhood and Elementary Literacy TBN, Coordinator of ESL and Foreign Language Carol Green, Director of Career and Technical Education Patty Kohler, Director of Exceptional Children Mable Donaldson, Supervisor of Gifted/Talented Education Leon Adams, Director of Federal Programs Ray Gillespie, Director of Athletics and Physical Education Lucy Neal, Director of Libraries/Media Centers and Instructional Technology Barbara Barnes, Special Education Supervisor Susan Chapman, Special Education Supervisor Planning and Development Team Linda Young Austin, Director of Planning and Development, Team Leader Randy Glenn, Special Education Supervisor Parent and Community Involvement Team Debbie Milam, Director of VIPS, Team Leader TBN, Coordinator of Title I Parent Involvement Parent Involvement Liaison, Title I Elna Hasberry, Special Education Supervisor Paulette Martin, Director of Adult Education Marion Baldwin, Director of Community Education Department of School Improvement The team leader for the three teams in School Improvement will be Dr. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent. This new department pulls together a multi-disciplinary group of people, all of whom are responsible to support school improvement and collective responsibility. Depending on the work that needs to be done, all may be working on professional development, test administration, program evaluation, or other assigned tasks, yet each team includes the necessary levels of expertise and specialization to provide leadership in the assigned areas. The School Improvement Teams will work closely with those reporting directly to the Associate Superintendent, and, as appropriate, members will be recruited from other teams to accomplish a task.Testing and Program Evaluation Team Ed Williams, Supervisor, Team Leader TBN, Program Evaluator for Title l/ESL TBN, Program Evaluator for NSF Yvette Dillingham, Testing Specialist Kathy Penn-Norman, Special Education Supervisor Professional Development Team Marion Woods, Coordinator, Team Leader Selma Hobby, Specialist Sue Walls, Specialist Gary Smith, Special Education Supervisor Eunice Smith, Special Education Supervisor Technical Assistance Team Mona Briggs, ACSIP (formerly COE) and CDP Coordinator, Team Leader Eddie McCoy, Title I Specialist Cassandra Steele, Special Education Coordinator1998-99 Work Plan for LRSD Priorities Priority: III. B (1) Continuum of Knowledge and Skills Major Tasks/Activities 1. Review and recommend revisions of the Boards Instruction policies. 2. Complete the 7-12 curriculum standards in English language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies. Plan Reference Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Goals 2000 Timeline April 1999 January 1999 Responsibility Bonnie Lesley Linda Young Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Marie McNeal Vanessa Cleaver Mable Donaldson Patty Kohler Lucy Lyon RECEIVED AUG 5 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONlTORINfi End-of-Year Report *Reviewed existing Board policies and Administrative Directives to determine needs for revision and new policy statements. *Obtained copies of NSBA model policies for curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Revised graduation policy for Board approval in December 1998. Reviewed 1991 Curriculum Audit for suggestions on necessary curriculum/instruction policies. Reviewed Arkansas Accreditation Standards. See also Priority I\nDesegregation and Education Plan/ A. Policies, #9. Drafted a new policy on Credit-by-Examination to be submitted to the Board of Education in February 1999. Drafted new regulations on elementary to middle school and from middle school to high school promotion to be submitted to the Board of Education for information at January 1999 meeting. Completed revision of 35 policies for the Boards first reading in June 1999\nremaining ones will be presented in July 1999, along with complete administrative regulations. Middle school program standards drafted, presented to the Board, and approved for use in developing core curriculum standards in October 1998. Teacher committees appointed to complete curriculum/program standards for reading/language arts and for ESL courses for grades 6- 12 (completed in June 1999). Social studies curriculum standards drafted for grades 7-12 (work completed March 1999). Standards in mathematics and science completed for grades 6-12 (work completed in March 1999). Dissemination of secondary curriculum standards/benchmarks is scheduled for August inservice.Major Tasks/Activities 3. Construct curriculum maps of LRSD standards/benchmarks with Arkansas standards, SAT9 testing objectives (plus other tests as appropriate), and instructional materials. Plan Reference Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Goals 2000 Timeline January 1999 Responsibility Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Marie McNeal Mable Donaldson Patty Kohler Lucy Lyon End-of-Year Report *K-6 language arts curriculum maps drafted, completed, and prepared for publication and dissemination in December 1998. *7-12 reading/language arts curriculum maps drafted, completed, and prepared for publication and dissemination in January 1999. *K-6 social studies curriculum maps drafted, completed, and prepared for publication and dissemination in December 1998. *7-12 social studies curriculum maps drafted, completed, and prepared for publication and dissemination in January 1999. *CuiTiculum maps for science and mathematics, grades K-4, have been completed and submitted to the Assoc. Supt. *Curriculum maps for science and mathematics, grades 5-8, have been completed.Major Tasks/Activities 4. Review and revise middle and high school Curriculum Catalog\nconduct orientation sessions for central office staff, principals, and counselors. 5. Develop specific plan for implementation of K-6 curriculum standards in English language arts and social studies. Plan Reference Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Goals 2000 Strategic Plan. Strategy 2 Timeline December 1998 February 1999 Responsibility Bonnie Lesley Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Marie McNeal Mable Donaldson Patty Kohler Lucy Lyon Carol Green Jo Evelyn Elston Gene Parker Marie McNeal Pat Price Mable Donaldson Patty Kohler End-of-Ycar Report *Notified central and school-level staff of deadline of October 16, 1998, for submitting proposed new courses. *Worked with school-level staff (teachers, counselors, registrars, principals) and with central curriculum staff in October, November, and early December to ensure accuracy of documented curriculum. Middle school curriculum committee approved proposed new middle school curriculum in November 1998. Middle School Steering Committee approved proposed new middle school curriculum in November 1998. Board approval of new middle school curriculum in November 1998. Published middle school course selection sheets for each of the eight middle schools in December 1998. Decided to publish triple-fold brochure on middle school curriculum for students and parents instead of a curriculum catalog\navailable in January 1999. Board approval of new high school courses and new high school curriculum in November 1998. Published High School Course Selection, 1999-2000 (for students and parents) in December 1998\ndistributed to Board members at December meeting. Published high school course selection sheets in December 1998. Published High School Curriculum Catalog, 1999-2000 (for principals, counselors, registrars, and teachers) in December 1998. Submitted new course numbers for middle and high school courses to technology department. Staff orientation meetings scheduled for elementary counselors, middle school principals and counselors, and high school teams during early January 1999. K-3 reading/language arts curriculum implementation plan drafted and revised. First draft presented to Board in March 1999\nfinal draft presented in June 1999. 4-5 reading/language arts curriculum implementation plan drafted in June 1999\nwill be submitted in late summer. First dissemination and inservice for implementation of curriculum standards/benchmarks conducted in June 2-3-4 inservice for grades K- 5. Dissemination and inservice for grade 6 will occur in August 1999. Conducted one week of training for trainers of ELLA during week of June 21, Scheduled one week of training on teaching reading/writing for grade 4 teachers during week of July 11.Major Tasks/Activities 6. Pilot new science curriculum in selected classes at grades K-8. 7. Pilot new mathematics curriculum in selected classes at grades K-8. 8. Complete plan for middle school curriculum for fall 1999. 9. Publish Middle and High School StudentZParent Curriculum Handbooks. 10. Define and establish Delivery Standards. 11. Align school schedules, PreK-12 reading curriculum, instructional strategies, materials, assessment, professional development, monitoring/ coaching, and parent information/ education with Strategic Plan, Desegregation Plan, and Smart Start. Plan Reference NSF Project Goals 2000 NSF Project Goals 2000 Strategic Plan: Strategics Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 5.4 Goals 2000 Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 and 3 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Goals 2000 Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Strategic Plan: Strategy 3. Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 521., 5.2.2, and 5.2.3 Timeline 1998-99 1998-99 October 1998 January 1999 January 1999 November 1998 Responsibility Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Mable Donaldson Patty Kohler Pat Price Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Mable Donaldson Patty Kohler Pat Price Linda Young Gene Parker Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Jo Evelyn Elston Marian Lacey Suellen Vann Bonnie Lesley Gene Parker Gene Parker Pat Price Patty Kohler Mable Donaldson Leon Adams Marion Woods End-of-Year Report Science and Technology for Children kits were piloted during the school year at Rockefeller, Franklin, Wakefield, and Chicot. Investigations in Data, Time, and Space were piloted during the school year at Romine, grades K-5. Connected Math Project has been piloted as a replacement module in all grade 6 and 7 classrooms in the District. See #4 above. Board approved middle school program standards in October 1998. Board approved new middle school curriculum in November 1999. See also Priority I. Desegregation and Education Plan/ B. Middle School #4, #5, and #10. Board approved funding for curriculum development in March 1999. New curriculum guides for middle school courses completed in June 1999.______________________________________________________ See #4 above. High School Course Selection, 1999-2000 (for students and parents) published in December 1998. Middle school curriculum brochure scheduled to be published in January 1999. Plans made to publish a Middle School booklet for students in parents in fall 1999 for 1999-2000 registration. Reviewed research syntheses on delivery standards for Far West Lab. Conducted preliminary conversations on what Delivery Standards for LRSD might look like, This project was delayed until late summer or fall 1999 and will be embedded in the Professional Development Plan.__________________ K-3 Literacy Committee met on Aug. 31, Sept. 16, Oct. 30, Dec. 17, and Jan. 8. Draft report of recommendations was completed on Dec. 18,1998. Report includes the following: Review of current District curriculum, assessment, and implementation. Review of Arkansas Smart Start Initiative to identify possible gaps between the Initiative components and the Districts curricular focus. Identification of all supplemental reading programs currently in use in primary level classrooms and noted compatibility with the goal, the District curriculum, and the Smart Start Initiative. (continued on next page)Major Tasks/Activities 12. Align school schedules, mathematics curriculum, and professional development with Strategic Plan and Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 13. Develop in collaboration with Linda Watson a list of behavior standards\nadopt a discipline/ classroom management/ character education program and curriculum for teaching the behavior standards to all students. 14. Propose for Board adoption revised Graduation Standards and revision of the core curriculum requirements to align with new state requirements. Plan Reference Strategic Plan: Strategy! Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 5.3, 5.3.1,5.3.2, 5.3.3, 5.3.4, 5.3.5 NSF Project Strategic Plan: Strategy 10 Goals 2000 State law Strategy Plan: Strategy 2 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, section 5.4 Goals 2000 Timeline November 1998 March 1999 November 1998 Responsibility Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Leon Adams Patty Kohler Mable Donaldson Pat Price Marion Woods Marie McNeal Jo Evelyn Elson Patty Kohler Linda Watson Bonnie Lesley Frances Cawthon Marian Lacey Kathy Lease Jo Evelyn Elston Marian Lacey Bonnie Lesley End-of-Year Report Comparison of District student performance to statewide student performance for the purpose of creating a context for District benchmarking. Summary of key components of best practice efforts in early reading education nationwide. Outline of recommendations. Proposed budget for 1999-2000. Drafted administrative regulations for Elementary Schools. The mathematics curriculum has been revised by a teacher committee to include a smaller number of concepts at each grade level. Training for teachers on the revised curriculum has begun and continued training will occur as the NSF standards-based math curricula are phased in over the next few years. CRTs are being developed for use each quarter in grades 2-6 to measure student mastery of the mathematics grade-level standards and benchmarks. 'NSF grant strategies are underway to improve student performance in * Algebra I and to increase enrollment and success rate in upper-level mathematics courses. The extended-year Algebra I program will take place during summer 1999 to help students achieve better in Algebra I. *Drafted adminstrative regulations to be presented in late summer. Conducted research on model classroom management programs. Exchanged information with Linda Watson. Scheduled a representative from each school to attend the ADE conference on Character-Center Teaching and Learning on January 26, 1999. Scheduled a meeting with Dr. Terry Roberts to consult with the District on this initiative on January 26,1999. Submitted grant proposal in May 1999 to fund training for nine elementary schools to pilot the Child Development Project. Submitted grant proposal in May 1999 to fund training for all secondary staff in Fred Jones Positive Discipline program. Scheduled to participate in training of trainers sessions in July sponsored by ADE. Board approval of new graduation policy in December 1999. Published new graduation policy in High School Course Selection, 1999-2000 (for students and parents) in December 1998. Published new graduation policy in High School Curriculum Catalog, 1999-2000 (for staff) in December 1998. Conducted orientation meetings on new graduation policy and high school curriculum for staff in early January 1999.,Major Tasks/Activities 15. Implement Year One of NSF grant project: Extended Year Algebra I\nAP examinations\nnew teacher training\nVital Link\nand Family Math/Science programs. Plan Reference NSF Project Timeline September 1999 Responsibility Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver End-of-Year Report *Extended Year Algebra ITimeline has been established and Algebra I teachers were invited in January to participate in planning the implementation of the Summer 1999 program. A possible collaboration with New Futures was discussed. Initial meeting was held in December 1998\nanother in late January. Students have been identified and invited to participate in the institute during July 26August 6,1999. Teachers participated in a planning session on June 15. A parent meeting was conducted on June 15* for potential SMART participants. Proposed CERTL application includes a collaboration with Philander Smith College for the Summer Readiness Program scheduled for July 19Aug. 6. Eight follow-up sessions are planned for SMART students, in collaboration with PSC, during the regular school year. They are designed to reinforce and expand algebraic skills. *AP ExamsDrafted proposed new policy in November 1998 to require all students who take AP courses to take the corresponding AP exams. Item was withdrawn for more work. *New Teacher TrainingFirst-year secondary mathematics and science teachers received four days of training on Oct. 13 and Dec. 10, 1998, and March 10-11,1999, * Vital LinkPlanning began on January 15 for recruiting additional Vital Link sites that focus on careers in the field of mathematics and science. Businesses with a math/science focus were identified. Overview of NSF grant presented uring the Vital Link teacher inservice as well as the inservice for businesses. Family Math/Science~Planning occurred for teams of teachers from seven schools to participate in the February 8-9 training. Teams of teachers from 5 schools participated in the Family Math/Science inservice on Feb. 8-9. Each team of teachers held 3 family math/science nights at their respective schools. Advisory Committee MeetingsCommittee met on Sept. 22, Oct. 27, Dec. 8, Feb, 23m Narch 23, April 27, and May 25 to review and discuss student performance data and upcoming grant activities. Plans are in progress for an advisory committee retreat. Definition of roles, as well as strategic planning, will be the focus of the retreat. Management Team MeetingsCommittee met monthly with the exception of December. Management Team will plan and implement the retreat for the advisory committee. (continued next page)Major Tasks/Activities Plan Reference Timeline Responsibility End-of-Year Report *Math/Science Vertical TeamsRegistered teachers for College Board sponsored vertical teams conference on Feb. 5-6 (mathematics) and Feb. 19-20 (science). Two mathematics vertical teams have met monthly. Mathematics Vertical Teams Steering Committee was established to set long- and short-range goals for the district. The steering committee met twice and set a time to meet monthly during the 1999-2000 school year. High School VisitsMet with principals and counselors of high schools to review and discuss first quarter data and to set improvement targets. Parent/Community InvolvementPresented an overview of the NSF project to the Christian Ministerial Alliance, Little Rock PTA Council, and the VIPS board. Year 2 plans include Brown Bag lunches at local businesses to inform working parents and the general public about this initiative. A dissemination brochure will be produced and distributed to parents, community, and business people. SECME9 teachers representing 5 schools will participate in the SECME Summer Institute June 20July 2,1999, at the University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa. SECME programs will be implemented in the 5 additional schools beginning fall 1999. Strategic Plan/Professional Development PlanDeveloped a five- year strategic plan along with a comprehensive professional development plan to guide the work of the LRPMSA. Standards-Based CurriculaTraining was provided for mathematics and science teachers who will be using Investigations, Science and Technology for Children, Connected Mathematics Project, and Active Physics. Follow-up sessions are planned for pre-school conference as well as during the regular school year. * Lead TeachersSubmitted a proposal to NSF to add 4 lead teachers who would work with clusters of elementary schools providing technical support for math and science teachers. Proposal also submitted to add (or assign an existing position) a high school math coordinator, middle school math specialist, a middle school science specialist, and a high school science specialist. *CERTLProposal submnitted to NSF for Centers of Excellence for Research, Teaching, and Learning. CERTL involves subcontracts with PSC, UALR, and LRSD for Active Physics training. UALR activities include a Summer Science Institute for 4* and 5* grade students\nUALR Student Research Camp will provide an opportunity for students to participate in real research projects\nPSC will offer the Summer Algebra Readiness Training which is a three-week summer institute for rising 9'* graders who show academic promise to be successful in Algebra I. LRSD will offer, in collaboration with UALR, a four-hour graduate credit course on Active Physics.Priority ill. B. (2): Personalized Education Major Tasks/Activities 16. Develop Early Childhood Education Plan for fall 1999, to include plan to implement any grant-funded early childhood initiatives. Plan Reference Strategic Plan: Strategy 8 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, section 2.7 and 5.1 Goals 2000 Timeline February 1999 Responsibility Pat Price Marian Shead- Jackson Patty Kohler Carol Green Aleecia Starkey End-of-Year Report Attended meetings of the collaborative partners involved in Headstart. Discussed the feasibility for expansion. Applied for and was awarded funds for continuance money from Arkansas Belter Chance. Early Childhood Task Force met on Nov. 23, 1998. Agenda items included overview of the program, quality status, and the need for expansion. District sponsored reception for representatives and senators to discuss 1999 legislative issues, such as early childhood funding, on Jan. 7,1999. Early Childhood Task Force meeting held on Jan. 25,1999. Agenda included discussion of issues which may initiate policy discussion and action by the Arkansas General Assembly, such as (1) funding for child care/ eliminating the low-income working waiting list\n(2) additional funding for the Arkansas Better Chance program.Major Tasks/Activities 17. Develop K-12 talent development plan to improve G/T, honors, and AP student enrollment and success (e.g.. Project AVID). Plan Reference Strategic Plan objectives Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 2.6, 2.6.1, and 2.6,2 NSF Project Timeline November 1998 Responsibility Bonnie Lesley Kathy Lease Mable Donaldson Vanessa Cleaver Gene Parker Marie McNeal Dennis Glasgow Mona Gibbs Jo Evelyn Elson Marion Woods End-of-Year Report K-23 Talent Development Committee was established in August 1998 to develop a plan\nresearch assignments were made\nand the committee moved to endorse the implementation of Project AVID as the centerpiece of this plan. Eliminated the honors/enriched layer of courses between the regular level and the Pre-AP/AP level at grades 6-12 for the 1999-2000 school year (approved by Board in November 1998). Made all AP courses (except Music Theory AP) available to all high schools for 1999-2000. Changed admission standards so that students with a grade of at least C in a prior Pre-AP or AP courses can enroll in the next level without teacher approval. Working on new policy/regulations relating to AP examinations to be submitted to the Board in summer 1999. *1 'Surveyed all honors, enriched, Pre-AP, and AP teachers to determine what training they had had so that a professional development plan could be designed. *Conducted study of current percentages by school who are performing in the top quartile\npercentages of students taking the ACT\npercentages of students enrolled in AP courses\npercentages of students passing AP courses by school\netc. Paid fee for Mable Donaldson to participate in the first year of training for Project AVID directors. Investigated two potential grants to fund the Project AVID initiative: Gear-Up and Javits federal grants. Applied for Gear-Up funds in collaboration with UALR to implement AVID in four middle schools, if funded, in fall 1999. Conducted one-half day of training on Project AVID for representatives of the curriculum staff, high school principals, high school counselors, parent representatives, and community advocates in October 1998. Conducted one evening of training for members of the Board of Education on Project AVID in October 1998. Distributed information on the Talent Development Middle School to all middle school principals for restructuring ideas. Continued research on effective strategies to close achievement gaps\nread new book on the Black-White Test Score Gap by Jencks.  Met with representative teachers and counselors at three of the five high schools to hear what they believe they need to support the goal of increasing AP enrollment. Discussed with E\u0026gt;r. Angela Sewell, Dean of Education at UALR, the possibility of a university partnership relating to Project AVID.Major Tasks/Activities 18. Review Title I programs and services to align with COE, Smart Start, Campus Leadership Plan, NSF, Strategic Plan, and Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 19. Complete planning for middle schools and smooth transitions from elementary and to high schools. Plan Reference Strategic Plan. Strategy 3 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, section 2.7 NSF Project Strategic Plan: Strategy?. Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, section 3.4 Goals 2000 Timeline January 1999 December 1998 Responsibility Bonnie Lesley Leon Adams Kathy Lease Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Gene Parker Pat Price Kathy Lease Linda Young M.S. Committees End-ofYear Report Met with ODM staff to discuss Project AVID and its potential benefits to LRSD students. Scheduled a meeting with Dr. Terry Roberts to discuss Project AVID on Jan. 26, 1999, Submitted Gear-Up grant proposal during March 1999 in collaboration with UALR to fund Project AVID in four middle schools\nSouthwest, Mablevale, Henderson, and Cloverdale. Conducted a meeting with Leon Adams on August 5,1998, to discuss several proposed changes and improvements in Title I. Conducted a meeting on the morning of September 4,1998, to review Title I regulations and laws\na team approach to approve Title I plans\nways to embed Title I accountability into the Quality Index\nand ways to align Title I with Campus Leadership. Conducted a meeting on the afternoon of September 4,1998, to discuss needs for a menu of research-based and district-approved programs for Title I schools to choose from\nprocedures for District approval of Title I plans\nalignment of Title I with Smart Start. Conducted meeting on Sept. 18 to discuss proposed changes in the Title I parent program. Conducted input all fall from parents, teachers, and principals on the Title I program and ways that it could be better aligned with other District initiatives and, thus, be more productive. Reviewed with and obtained input from the Cabinet on Jan. 11, 1999, general areas for change and improvement of the Title I program. Embedded Title I changes in the PreK-3 Literacy Plan. Conducted meetings with principals in April 1999 to discuss changes in 1999-2000 Title I program. Summarized changes in Title I program in principals meeting during May 1999. Met several times in May-June with Cabinet members to make decisions relating to changes in Title I. Met with representative Title I parents in May 1999 to discuss proposed changes in Title I. See Priority I: Desegregation and Education Plan/ B. Middle School, #3, #6.Major Tasks/Activities 20. Complete planning for ninth grade curriculum aligned with new graduation requirements and the districts standards. 21. Assess ESL program and services and develop program improvement plan with estimated budget. 22. Review special education programs, policies, and/or procedures to ensure no racial discrimination in referral and placement. Plan Reference Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 And Strategy 3 State laws Strategic Plan: Strategy 2. Goals 2000 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, section 2.4 Timeline November 1998 June 1999 December 1998 Responsibility Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley Gene Parker Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley Patty Kohler End-of-Year Report *See #4 above. *Board approval of new high school curriculum, including grade 9 courses, in November 1998. *See Priority I: Desegregation and Education Plan/ B. Middle School, #10._______________________________________________________ *Committee chair appointed to gather data for program/needs assessment. *ESL program representative attended statewide program planning conference. Committee appointed to develop ESL program standards and to identify budget needs. Committee appointed to develop ESL curriculum standards. Met with representative of ADE on needs of LRSDs ESL program. Hosted compliance review by OCR in March 1999 relating to ESL programs and services. Proposed that Class-Size Reducation Allocation be used to hire 10 elementary ESL teachers for 1999-2000. Proposed that the District employ an ESL Coordinator to oversee and provide leadership for the K-12 program. *Tridistrict assessment committee meets regularly to review testing procedures and to make sure that they are free of bias. *Department of Exceptional Childrens strategic plan updated in Dec. 1998\nincludes procedures and equity issues. *Completed an administrative procedures manual in Dec. 1998 for all special education staff to ensure equity in administration of procedures\ncontains checklists to evaluate staffing needs\nsupervisory goals, including equity issues\nLRSD policies that address graduation, which are bias-free\nand other procedures.Major Tasks/Activities 23. Begin needs assessment and initial planning for implementation of Smart Start program from ADE. Plan Reference Arkansas initiative Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, section 2.7 Timeline January 1999 Responsibility Bonnie Lesley Kathy Lease Leon Adams Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Gene Parker Pat Price Patty Kohler Ann Freeman End*of-Year Report Dr. Doug Reeves presented early concepts of Smart Start standards and assessments to a small group from the Division of Instruction in September 1998. Kevin Penix from ADE presented an overview of the Smart Start Initiative to the Division of Instruction on Oct. 14,1998. Bonnie Lesley and Les Gamine attended a session with Dr. Doug Reeves at a state conference in October 1998 on Smart Start. Ann Freeman was reassigned to assist Pat Price with coordination of Smart Start programs and services for LRSD during November 1998. Eisenhower Professional Development grant application aligned with Smart Start submitted to ADE in November 1998. All elementary principals and a facilitator from each school attended two days of Smart Start training sponsored by ADE during the week of Nov. 9-12, 1998, Bonnie Lesley presented session on how Smart Start aligns with Title I, COE, and Campus Leadership at the November principals meeting. Pat Price and Ann Freeman presented an overview of the Smart Start Summit to the Division of Instruction on Nov. 24,1998. Work sessions on standards and assessments conducted by the Division of Instruction on Dec. 14,1998. Presentation of a one-day Data-Driven Decision-Making session for all elementary principals is scheduled for Jan. 19-20-21, 1999. All principals were invited to attend a one-day conference on Character-Centered Teaching and Positive Classroom Discipline Conference, sponsored by ADE, on Jan. 26,1999. Ten satellite teleconferences relating to Smart Start were held at the IRC during year. District representatives attended the NSCI conference on reading and mathematics in New Orleans during January. Frequent information regarding Smart Start implementation was provided principals and other staff through Learning Links during spring 1999.Priority III. B (3): Professional Development Major Tasks/Activities 24. Complete planning and begin implementation of middle school professional development program. 25. Conduct in collaboration with Sadie Mitchell and her staff the Year One training for Campus Leadership Plan. 26. Restructure the districts professional development program and services so that they build professional learning communities at the district and school levels. 27. Implement Year One of ASCDs UPDI project with focus on school change and improving achievement in reading and mathematics. 28. Provide training in prejudice reduction and cultural sensitivity. Plan Reference Strategic Plan: Strategy 3 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, section 2.12 Campus Leadership Plan Goals 2000 Strategic Plan: Strategy 7 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 2.61., 2.12, 5.2.1j, 5.2.2g, 5.2.3c. 5.3.1 Campus Leadership Plan NSF ASCDs UPDI ASCDs UPDI Revised Desegregation and Education, section 2.12 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 2.12 and 2.12.1 Timeline January 1999 June 1999 October 1998 June 1999 June 1999 Responsibility Linda Young Marion Woods Mona Briggs Kathy Lease Prof. Dev. Committee Bonnie Lesley Marion Woods Gene Parker Kathy Lease Patty Kohler Bonnie Lesley Director, Prof. Dev. Marion Woods Bonnie Lesley Dir., Prof. Dev. Marion Woods Marion Woods City of Little Rock End-of-Year Report See Priority I: Desegregation and Education Plan/ B. Middle School, #4 and #12. The responsibility for this activity was transferred to Sadie Mitchell and her staff. Broker and principal training sessions were conducted in December 1998, January and February 1999. Principals Institute, to include representatives of Campus Leadership Teams, scheduled for week of July 26,1999. Invited by ASCD in August 1998 to apply to join the Urban Professional Development Initiative (UPDI). Presented idea to Cabinet for approval to join UPDI in August 1998. Submitted application to join UPDI to ASCD on August 20, 1998. Presented information item to Board of Education about UPDI in August 1998. Formed a special team to restructure LRSD professional development program and to oversee UPDI activities\nfirst meeting held on Sept. 3, 1998. Four people attended UPDI Network meeting in Alexandria, VA, on Nov. 12-14, 1998. Received official letter of invitation from ASCD to participate in UPDI, Nov. 20,1998. Staff meeting scheduled to begin discussion of professional development plan on Jan. 25,1999. Site visit from ASCD for UPDI conducted on Feb. 1-2,1999. End-of-Quarter Report submitted to ASCD on March 30,1999, Professional Development Plan to be completed during summer 1999.______________________________________________________ See #26 above. Five two-day workshops serving 94 teachers were presented on the following dates: Aug. 4-5\nSept. 14 and 21\nOct. 19 and 22\nNov. 16 and 19\nand Jan. 6 and 13. Scheduled a meeting with Dr. Terry Roberts on Jan. 26,199^, to discuss professional development issues. Workshop conducted for high school teachers on June 4,1999. Tri-District staff development committee and state coops met ten times during year to compile information for districts catalogs, resource guides, and professional libraries.Major Tasks/Activities 29. Consolidate COE, Campus Leadership, Title I, and Instructional Technological planning requirements in collaboration with cluster assignment\ndesign and plan training for Campus Leadership Teams. 30. Develop menus of research-based and approved schoolwide change models and instructional/ curriculum interventions to guide schools in improvement efforts. 31. Assemble a library of reference folders on a wide variety of topics related to school improvement to send to schools upon request. 32. Write and prepare for Fall 1999 distribution a Beginning Teachers Handbook. 33. Provide focused and appropriate training for certified staff in Division of Instruction to improve productivity and leadership. 34. Provide appropriate technology and general training for clerical staff of Division of Instruction to improve productivity and communication. Plan Reference COE Campus Leadership Plan Title I Instructional Technology Plan Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Title I Smart Start COE Campus Leadership Plan Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Title I Smart Start COE Campus Leadership Plan Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Strategic Plan: Strategy 6 Goals 2000 Goals 2000 Campus Leadership Plan Strategic Plan Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Smart Start Title I COE Strategic Plan Timeline January 1999 February 1999 January 1999 May 1999 June 1999 June 1999 Responsibility Bonnie Lesley Sadie Mitchell and her cluster teams Leon Adams Lucy Lyon Director, Prof. Dev. Marion Woods Bonnie Lesley Leon Adams Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Marie McNeal Vanessa Cleaver Marion Woods Selma Hobby Marion Woods Bonnie Lesley Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley Marion Woods Lucy Lyon End-of-Year Report This work was assigned to one of the clusters to complete. Leadership for these tasks was assigned to Sadie Mitchell. Conducted two meetings in September 1998 to begin the discussion of criteria to identify research-based programs. Recommended best practice books which summarize research to schools through Learning Links. Approved literacy programs were included in the PreK-3 Literacy Plan, Books on research-based programs provided to principals by Division of Instruction. Approximately 75 information folders on a variety of topics related to school reform have been compiled and are available to principals and Campus Leadership Teams. Videotapes and books on middle schools were identified for middle school principals and teachers to check out. Outline for Beginning Teachers Handbook compiled in August 1998. Committee on Teacher Induction, chaired by Dr. Kathy Lease, appointed in spring 1999. Draft of Beginning Teachers Handbook completed in June 1999. 1 *ADE-sponorsed workshop on curriculum mapping by Heidi Jacobs attended by most curriculum staff members in September 1998. Presentation by Dr. Doug Reeves (the state consultant on Smart Start) to curriculum staff members in September 1998. Presentation on Smart Start by Dr. Kevin Pennick from ADE at a Division of Instruction meeting on October 14,1998. Data-Analysis Training (related to Smart Start implementation) presented at meeting of Division of Instruction in December 1998. Four people attended class on Microsoft Word on Oct. 20-22. Four people attended class on PowerPoint on Oct. 26-27. Eight people attended class on Excel on Oct. 19-26. *1 *A number of courses were scheduled for February 1999. *Summer technology classes are being offered.Major Tasks/Activities 35. Provide training for teachers and counselors to improve minority student access and success in Pre-AP and AP courses. Plan Reference Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, section 2.6.2 NSF Project Timeline November 1998 Responsibility Bonnie Lesley Kathy Lease Mable Donaldson Vanessa Cleaver Gene Parker Marie McNeal Dennis Glasgow Mona Gibbs Jo Evelyn Elston Marion Woods End-of-Year Report *Conducted one-half session on Project AVID for high school counselors and others in September 1998. *Conducted curriculum orientation meetings for principal and counselors at each high school, including discussion of this priority, in January 1999. *Conducted curriculum orientation session for elementary counselors, including discussion of this priority, on Jan. 20,1999. *Conducted curriculum orientation session for middle school counselors, including discussion of this priority, on Jan. 20,1999. *Developed a plan to ensure that teachers of Pre-AP and AP have equal access and opportunity to participate in College Board professional development workshops during the summer.Priority III. B (4): Building Community Support Major Tasks/Activities 36. Design plan to collaborate with the business community to deliver the Arkansas Scholars program in grade 8 during spring 1999. 37. Restructure the districts parent/ community programs and services to align with the Strategic Plan, the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, the Campus Leadership Plan, the NSF Project, Smart Start, and the requirements of Title I. Plan Reference Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (sections on enriched, honors, gifted, and advanced placement courses). Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 And Strategy 8 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 2.8 and 5.7 Campus Leadership Plan Goals 2000 Timeline December 1998 December 1998 Responsibility Debbie Milam Linda Young Gene Parker End-of-Year Report 'Meeting held on Sept. 24, 1998, with Lee Gordon, ABEA, Bonnie 1 Bonnie Lesley Debbie Milam Leon Adams Catherine Gill Linda Young Patty Kohler Pat Price Paulette Martin Marian Shead- Jackson Marian Baldwin Vanessa Cleaver Lesley, Gene Parker, Linda Young, and Debbie Milam. *Meeting held on Oct. 15,1998, at Chambers Education Committee. Lee Gordon asked for support in recruiting business volunteers to make the Arkansas Scholars presentations to all 8* graders in the three Pulaski County school districts. Meeting held on Dec. 7, 1998, between Debbie Milam and Linda Young to discuss a timeline for LRSD implementation. Meeting scheduled for Jan. 15,1999, between Debbie Milam, LRSD, and Joe Swaty and Sandy Bradley of the Chamber to discuss feasibility of implementing Arkansas Scholars in spring 1999. Arkansas Scholars program implemented in spring 1999. Discussed with Catherine Jordan of SEDL the possibility of Little Rocks participation in their Collaborative Action Team (CAT) training. Conducted a meeting including staff, some community/parent representatives, and Catherine Jordan on November 2 for initial discussion of possible partnership to assist us in restructuring our parent/community programs. Conducted second meeting of committee on November 20,1998, to discuss whether to apply to SEDL for CAT participation\nwrote mission statement for group. Sent application in December 1998 to SEDL to participate in CAT training. Conducted third meeting on January 14,1999, to discuss focus for our work\nparent education/involvement. Fourth meeting and expanded committee membership will be decided upon after conversation with Catherine Jordan about training. Two representatives attended SEDL training in late January 1999. Two SEDL representatives conducted a site visit in Little Rock on April 27 with a cross-section of staff, parents, and community members. Notifed in May 1999 of selection to participate with SEDL in Collaborative Action Team planning. Began implementation of plan to restructure and re-align Title 1 parent program.Priority III. B. (5): Communication Major Tasks/Activities 38. Communicate curriculum standards so that all parents and students understand the expected knowledge and skills by grade level and course. 39. Communicate aspects of middle school planning to students, parents, and community for fall 1999. 40. Provide second-language translations of key documents for students and parents. 41. Implement Learning Links, a weekly publication for principals from the Division of Instruction. 42. Publish at lease six issues of a newsletter for teachers from the Division of Instruction. 43. Conduct twice-a-month meetings for staff in the Division of Instruction. 44. Conduct quarterly meetings of all clerical staff in the Division of Instruction. Plan Reference Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Strategic Plan: Strategy 3 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Goals 2000 Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Student Success Model Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Student Success Model Student Success Model Student Success Model Timeline May 1999 May 1999 May 1999 September 1998 June 1999 June 1999 August 1998June 1999 Responsibility Bonnie Lesley Suellen Vann Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Marie McNeal Kathy Lease Linda Young Gene Parker Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley Anita Gilliam Regina Moore Marian Baldwin Suellen Vann Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley and designated staff End-of-Year Report Committee appointed to develop action plan for communicating curriculum standards to the community. Action plan presented to Strategic Plan Steering Committee and approved in November 1998. Committee appointed to complete identified action steps in approved action plan.  ' 'Designed an audio-visual presentation to communicate the new graduation standards\nto be completed by early Feb. 1999. (This video not yet completed.) Planning established to publish curriculum standards for parents in summer 1999. Draft documents completed in June 1999. See Priority I: Desegregation and Education Plan/B. Middle School, #6, #14. See Priority I: Desegregation and Education Plan/C. Marketing and Communication, #1, #2. See Priority I: Desegregation and Education Plan/ D. Student Assignment, #8, #13. State-developed computer software discs acquired with translations of key documents for ESL students and parents. Budgeted for 1999-2000 the costs of translations of key documents. Learning Links has been published weekly since the first week in October 1998 for principals\nit has also been distributed to Cabinet members, most department heads, and members of the Division of Instruction. Meetings conducted with Public Information Office to determine cost and deadlines for publishing a teacher newsletter\nproject delayed due to costs and time restraints. This project delayed until 1999-2000. Staff meetings are scheduled for the second and fourth Wednesdays each month at the IRC\nthey are attended by all the department heads in the Division of Instruction, as well as other staff as appropriate. Monthly meetings conducted in spring 1999. Two meetings were conducted with the clerical staff of the Division of Instruction.Priority III. B (6): Assessment Major Tasks/Activities 45. Design and administer CRTs for fall 1998 in reading and mathematics. 46. Design refined CRTs for reading, mathematics, science, and social studies for piloting in spring 1999 and for implementation in fall 1999. 47. Establish Performance Standards in reading, writing, mathematics, science, and social studies. 48. Reinvent PRE programs and services to support the Campus Leadership Plan. 49. Refine the Quality Index indicators and develop district and school profiles according to the proposed Quality Index. 50. Embed Title I and Smart Start accountability requirements into the Quality Index. 51. Begin transition plan for a way of reporting to parents on student progress toward meeting the standards and develop plan to redesign the student grading and reporting system to reflect the standards- based focus of the district. Plan Reference Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Strategic Plan: Strategy 2. Strategic Plan: Strategy 8 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 5.2.1g, 5.2.2e,5.2.3r, and 5.3.2 Campus Leadership Plan NSF Title I and Smart Start COE Campus Leadership Plan Campus Leadership Plan Title I requirements Strategic Plan: Strategy 2 Timeline September 1998 December 1998 February 1999 December 1998 February 1999 February 1999 June 1999 Responsibility Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Kathy Lease Kathy Lease Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Marie McNeal Kathy Lease Dennis Glasgow Gene Parker Vanessa Cleaver Marie McNeal Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Cluster B Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley Cluster B Kathy Lease Leon Adams Kathy Lease Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Marie McNeal Pat Price Patty Kohler Mable Donaldson End-of-Year Report CRTs have been designed, produced, disseminated, given, scored, and reported. Tests were given in reading and mathematics at all elementary schools. Instructional division staff met in January to review first semester CRT experiences and begin planning for the third and fourth quarter tests in all core subject areas with the addition of the second graders. Planning still in progress for 1999-2000 CRTs. A meeting was scheduled in February to work on this goal. This project was delayed until decisions were made about 1999-2000 CRTs. New staff hired in order to begin to refocus the work of PRE. Staff assignments made to support Campus Leadership, the Strategic Plan, and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Public relations campaign instituted to promote idea that PRE is a service department whose focus is to assist schools and central office staff to reach the goals of the Campus Leadership Plan, the Strategic Plan, and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. *1999-2000 Reorganization Plan establishes new concept for department. See Priority II: Quality Index (2) Student Achievement and Value- Added Incentives. See Priority II: Quality Index (2) Student Achievement and Value- Added Incentives. This work on a new grading system has not begun as yet. Discussions conducted during the first semester on student data management systems capacities and deficiencies. 'Primary Grades Committee established in May 1999 to make recommendations, as per PreK-3 Literacy Plan.Major Tasks/Activities 52. Design waiver form and process for schools seeking waivers from policy relating to Campus Leadership. 53. Redesign end-of-year climate survey to include items relating to measuring progress of reform. 54. Design for Board approval an agenda for evaluation of the Districts academic programs. Plan Reference Campus Leadership Plan Campus Leadership Plan Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, section 2.7.1 Campus Leadership Plan Timeline October 1998 February 1999 March 1999 Responsibility Bonnie Lesley Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley Sadie Mitchell Kathy Lease Bonnie Lesley End-of-Year Report________________________________ Waiver Application forms distributed via Learning Links in December 1998. *Work in progress with Cluster A and PRE staff. Drafts scheduled for completion in February. Two work sessions with Dr. Steven Ross (consultant) have been completed on initial planning. PRE staff researched program evaluation options. One-day planning meeting scheduled with numerous stakeholders in May 1999. Proposed Board policy developed and submitted to the Board for first reading in June 1999.Priority: Quality Index: (2) Student Achievement and Value-Added Incentives Major Tasks/Activities 1. Identify specific achievement indicators. 2. Identify specific standards/ benchmarks. 3. Identify value-added incentives. Plan Reference Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 2.7,5.2.1,and 5.3 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 2.7, 5.2, and 5.3. Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, sections 5.8 Timeline June 1999 June 1999 June 1999 Responsibility Lesley/Cluster B Lesley/Cluster B Lesley/Cluster B End-of-Year Report *Conducted first meeting of Cluster B on Nov. 20,1998. Reviewed charge, draft of Campus Leadership Plan, and resource documents\ndiscussed and approved proposed work plan for completion of tasks. *Conducted Internet search and purchased other resources to determine practices in other states and districts, especially those with value-added approaches. *Drafted preliminary list of academic indicators for elementary, middle, and high schools for the Quality Index to use for discussion purposes, Jan. 1999. Met with Dr. Steve Ross of the University of Memphis on Jan. 15, 1999, to discuss Tennessees value-added accountability system and preliminary LRSD draft of academic indicators. Second meeting of Cluster B scheduled for Feb. 15,1999. Third meeting of Cluster B conducted on May 6-7,1999. Discussed with Dr. Steve Ross (see #1 above) ways to assign weights of importance and ways to assess progress toward standards at Jan. 15, 1999, meeting. Consulted research documents on practices in other states and districts. Met with Dr. Steve Ross in May 1999 to continue discussion of academic indicators for Quality Index. Submitted Dr. Ross recommendations to Dr. Camine for feedback. Final report submitted in June 1999. Conducted preliminary research on practices in other states and districts. Final report submitted in June 1999.i RECEP' A  } Collective Responsibility for Student Achieverhent AUG 5 1999 Office OF Definition of Collective Responsibility , OESEGREGATfON MONrrOfl.NP Collective Responsibility means that all the adults in the District arfd at each school hold themselves accountable for all the students meeting the challenging behavior and academic content standards and benchmarks and other outcomes established by the Board of Education, by the state for accreditation, by federally funded programs, and by external funders of reform initiatives approved by the Board of Education. District-level staff share with school-level staffs in the collective responsibility for school improvement. This critically important attitude is developed and nurtured through professional learning communities established by the District and each school. In addition, the Superintendent shall ensure that all job descriptions of appropriate District-level and building-level staff\nannual work plans\nDistrict-level processes and school-level parameters for decision-making\npersonnel hiring, assignment, promotion, and evaluation systems\nand the professional development programs are results-based and aligned with the improvement indicators established in the Quality Index. Reporting Responsibilities The Superintendent shall report to the Board of Education annually on progress related to the implementation of the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. In addition, so that the community is also informed on the Districts progress in meeting expected improvement goals, the following reports must be submitted to the Board of Education in open sessions. District Annual Performance Report The Annual Performance Report is to be submitted to the Board of Education no later than August 30 annually. It shall include data relating to each of the Quality Indicators, including the baseline year data so that progress can be identified. The Annual Performance Report shall also include the accreditation status and accountability status for each school, as determined by the Arkansas Department of Education. School Performance Reports The state-mandated School Performance Reports shall be published and distributed to parents and other interested patrons annually. These report cards shall include the data mandated by the Arkansas Department of Education, but also school data relating to the Districts Quality Indicators. School principals shall disseminate these reports to all the staff members and parents in their school community and make them available to interested patrons. At least one parent meeting shall be conducted annually by the Campus Leadership Team and the principal to discuss the 1performance of the school and planned short- and long-range improvements. The District may disseminate school-level supplements to the School Performance Reports to include data relating to District-selected Quality Indicators. Accreditation and Accountability Status If a school has been identified for school improvement, as per Title I regulations and/or if the school is conditionally accredited or nonaccredited, then the designation and an explanation of its implications, as well as the accountability status of the school as defined by the State shall be included in the School Performance Report. Program Evaluations The results of any internal program evaluation studies or evaluations of grant-funded projects are to be provided to the Board of Education within a month of their submission to the Superintendent and/or to the funding organization. School Improvement Plans Although there are multiple state and local indicators, Campus Leadership Teams should select, based on their data analysis, three to five priority improvement goals as a focus for the School Improvement Plan. (See the Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Planning process.) 2State Quality IndicatorsTier I The Arkansas Comprehensive Testing. Assessment, and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) establishes the following indicators based on performance goals for Tier I: State Indicator______ Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests Goal (Definition)_______________ 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics. Grade Level(s) Grades 4, 6, 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Algebra I. 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. Secondary School Drop Out Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development School Safety 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Literacy. At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12^^ grade.__________________ Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%.________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher._______________________ 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually.___________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. Grades 7-12 Grades K-12 Grades K-12 Grades K-12 Grades K-12 3State Quality IndicatorsTier II The Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) establishes the following indicators for Tier II. Tier II indicators are based on trend and improvement goals. Trend goals will be established for different cohorts of students, and improvement goals will be established for the same cohort of students over time. State Indicator Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests Goal (Definition)_______________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion- referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Literacy will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Grade Level(s) Grades 4, 6, and 8 Secondary 4Tier IISchool Selected Indicators (Schools Select Any 5) State Indicator Drop-outs Average Daily Attendance__________ Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher____________ Professional Development School Safety Other School Selected Indicators Goal (Definition)_______________ Secondary schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12**^ grade. Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate.____________ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher.________________ Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts.________ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Grade Level(s) Secondary All levels All levels All levels All levels All levels 5Additional District-Selected Indicators The following additional academic indicators (based also on both performance and trend/improvement) have been established by the Little Rock School District. Value-Added Goals or Improvement Goals The District-adopted criterion-referenced tests for grades K-11 will be administered to provide pre- and post-test scores so that gains of individual students may be measured each semester. Only those scores of students who were in the school the previous test administration will be used in calculating value-added gains (or improvement). The purpose of this measure is to be able to determine the extent to which a school adds value through individual students' gains. In other words, regardless of whether students attain the proficient level at any given grade, the District is interested in whether the students progressed toward proficiency during that year. Both trend and improvement data will be tracked as well. LRSD Indicator_______ Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test Goal (Definition)______________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pretest to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. Grade Level(s) Kindergarten Grade 1 The percent of grade 1 students demonstrating gains from the pretest to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 6LRSD Indicator_______ Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Test Goal (Definition)_______________ 65% of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50 percentile in reading. ,th Grade Levelfs) Grades 5, 7, 10 The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50*^ percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50^ percentile in mathematics. Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Test The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50^ percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 7LRSD Indicator_______ Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Test Goal (Definition)_______________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. Grade Level(s) Performance on District-Adopted Criterion-Referenced Tests The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pretest to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. Grades 2-11 8LRSD Indicator Goal (Definition)_______________ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. Grade Level(s) Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pretest to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 65% of middle and high school students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year. Grades 6-12 Enrollment in Algebra I by grade 8 The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. Grade 8 Honors Seal on High School Diploma The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high schools students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas. The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Grades 9-12 9LRSD Indicator Taking the ACT Goal (Definition)_______________ 65% of a high schools students will take the ACT. Grade Level(s) Grades 11-12 Performance on the ACT The percent of students taking the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each\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":"gsg_1121-100_0468","title":"Ralph Mark Gilbert Civil Rights Museum","collection_id":"gsg_1121-100","collection_title":"W.W. Law Photograph Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Chatham County, Savannah, 32.08354, -81.09983"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1998-12-29"],"dcterms_description":["Color photograph of W. W. Law speaking with people at the Ralph Mark Gilbert Civil Rights Museum."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["1121-100, W. W. Law Photograph Collection, City of Savannah, Research Library \u0026 Municipal Archives, Savannah, Georgia"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Georgia--Savannah","Museums--Georgia--Savannah","Museum exhibits--Georgia--Savannah"],"dcterms_title":["Ralph Mark Gilbert Civil Rights Museum"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["City of Savannah Municipal Archives"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://savannahga.pastperfectonline.com/photo/54C768A3-9EC2-4F48-A5B1-130924932881"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["Courtesy of City of Savannah, Research Library \u0026 Municipal Archives"],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["photographs"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Law, W. W. (Westley Wallace), 1923-2002"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":413,"next_page":414,"prev_page":412,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":4944,"total_count":81191,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"educator_resource_mediums_sms","items":[{"value":"lesson plans","hits":319},{"value":"teaching guides","hits":53},{"value":"timelines (chronologies)","hits":43},{"value":"online exhibitions","hits":38},{"value":"bibliographies","hits":15},{"value":"study guides","hits":11},{"value":"annotated bibliographies","hits":9},{"value":"learning modules","hits":6},{"value":"worksheets","hits":6},{"value":"slide shows","hits":4},{"value":"quizzes","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":40200},{"value":"StillImage","hits":35114},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":4552},{"value":"Sound","hits":3248},{"value":"Collection","hits":41},{"value":"InteractiveResource","hits":25}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Peppler, Jim","hits":4965},{"value":"Phay, John E.","hits":4712},{"value":"University of Mississippi. Bureau of Educational Research","hits":4707},{"value":"Baldowski, Clifford H., 1917-1999","hits":2599},{"value":"Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission","hits":2255},{"value":"Thurmond, Strom, 1902-2003","hits":2077},{"value":"WSB-TV (Television station : Atlanta, Ga.)","hits":1475},{"value":"Newman, I. DeQuincey (Isaiah DeQuincey), 1911-1985","hits":1003},{"value":"The State Media Company (Columbia, S.C.)","hits":926},{"value":"Atlanta Journal-Constitution","hits":844},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":778}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"African Americans--Civil rights","hits":9441},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":8347},{"value":"African Americans","hits":5895},{"value":"Mississippi--Race relations","hits":5750},{"value":"Race relations","hits":5607},{"value":"Education, Secondary","hits":5083},{"value":"Education, Elementary","hits":4729},{"value":"Segregation in education--Mississippi","hits":4727},{"value":"Education--Pictorial works","hits":4707},{"value":"Civil rights demonstrations","hits":4436},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":3530}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966--Correspondence","hits":1888},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1809},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1709},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1282},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1071},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":858},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":814},{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":719},{"value":"Mizell, M. Hayes","hits":674},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":626}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"name_authoritative_sms","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":2598},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1909},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1704},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1331},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1070},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":856},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":806},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":625},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":605},{"value":"Snelling, Paula","hits":580},{"value":"Williams, Hosea, 1926-2000","hits":431}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":1763},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1670},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":965},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":704},{"value":"Memphis Sanitation Workers Strike","hits":366},{"value":"Selma-Montgomery March","hits":337},{"value":"Freedom Summer","hits":306},{"value":"Freedom Rides","hits":214},{"value":"Poor People's Campaign","hits":180},{"value":"University of Georgia Integration","hits":173},{"value":"University of Alabama Integration","hits":140}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":17820},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":5428},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Montgomery County, Montgomery, 32.36681, -86.29997","hits":5151},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":4862},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4610},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":4177},{"value":"United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026","hits":3943},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2910},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":2579},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2430},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":2387}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Georgia","hits":12843},{"value":"Alabama","hits":11307},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":10219},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":8503},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":4583},{"value":"Texas","hits":4399},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":3770},{"value":"Florida","hits":2601},{"value":"Ohio","hits":2391},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1893},{"value":"New York","hits":1667}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1966","hits":10514},{"value":"1963","hits":10193},{"value":"1965","hits":10119},{"value":"1956","hits":9832},{"value":"1955","hits":9611},{"value":"1964","hits":9268},{"value":"1968","hits":9243},{"value":"1962","hits":9152},{"value":"1967","hits":8771},{"value":"1957","hits":8460},{"value":"1958","hits":8242},{"value":"1961","hits":8241},{"value":"1959","hits":8046},{"value":"1960","hits":7940},{"value":"1954","hits":7239},{"value":"1969","hits":7235},{"value":"1950","hits":7117},{"value":"1953","hits":6968},{"value":"1970","hits":6743},{"value":"1971","hits":6337},{"value":"1977","hits":6280},{"value":"1952","hits":6161},{"value":"1972","hits":6144},{"value":"1951","hits":6045},{"value":"1975","hits":5806},{"value":"1976","hits":5771},{"value":"1974","hits":5729},{"value":"1973","hits":5591},{"value":"1979","hits":5329},{"value":"1978","hits":5318},{"value":"1980","hits":5279},{"value":"1995","hits":4829},{"value":"1981","hits":4724},{"value":"1994","hits":4654},{"value":"1948","hits":4596},{"value":"1949","hits":4571},{"value":"1996","hits":4486},{"value":"1982","hits":4330},{"value":"1947","hits":4316},{"value":"1985","hits":4226},{"value":"1998","hits":4225},{"value":"1997","hits":4202},{"value":"1983","hits":4174},{"value":"1984","hits":4065},{"value":"1946","hits":4046},{"value":"1999","hits":4018},{"value":"1945","hits":4017},{"value":"1990","hits":3937},{"value":"1986","hits":3919},{"value":"1943","hits":3899},{"value":"1944","hits":3895},{"value":"1942","hits":3867},{"value":"2000","hits":3808},{"value":"2001","hits":3790},{"value":"1940","hits":3764},{"value":"1941","hits":3757},{"value":"1987","hits":3657},{"value":"2002","hits":3538},{"value":"1991","hits":3507},{"value":"1936","hits":3506},{"value":"1939","hits":3500},{"value":"1938","hits":3465},{"value":"1937","hits":3449},{"value":"1992","hits":3444},{"value":"1993","hits":3422},{"value":"2003","hits":3403},{"value":"1930","hits":3377},{"value":"1989","hits":3355},{"value":"1935","hits":3306},{"value":"1933","hits":3270},{"value":"1934","hits":3270},{"value":"1988","hits":3269},{"value":"1932","hits":3254},{"value":"1931","hits":3239},{"value":"2005","hits":3057},{"value":"2004","hits":2909},{"value":"1929","hits":2789},{"value":"2006","hits":2774},{"value":"1928","hits":2271},{"value":"1921","hits":2123},{"value":"1925","hits":2039},{"value":"1927","hits":2025},{"value":"1924","hits":2011},{"value":"1926","hits":2009},{"value":"1920","hits":1975},{"value":"1923","hits":1954},{"value":"1922","hits":1928},{"value":"2016","hits":1925},{"value":"2007","hits":1629},{"value":"2008","hits":1578},{"value":"2011","hits":1575},{"value":"2019","hits":1537},{"value":"1919","hits":1532},{"value":"2009","hits":1532},{"value":"1918","hits":1530},{"value":"2015","hits":1527},{"value":"2013","hits":1518},{"value":"2010","hits":1515},{"value":"2014","hits":1481},{"value":"2012","hits":1467}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":500952,"missing":56},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"photographs","hits":10708},{"value":"correspondence","hits":9437},{"value":"black-and-white photographs","hits":7678},{"value":"negatives (photographs)","hits":7513},{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":4462},{"value":"letters (correspondence)","hits":3623},{"value":"oral histories (literary works)","hits":3607},{"value":"black-and-white negatives","hits":2740},{"value":"editorial cartoons","hits":2620},{"value":"newspapers","hits":1955},{"value":"manuscripts (documents)","hits":1692}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/","hits":41178},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":17554},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8828},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":6864},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/","hits":2186},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/","hits":1778},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-CR/1.0/","hits":1115},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/","hits":197},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/","hits":60},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/","hits":51},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/","hits":27}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Jim Peppler Southern Courier Photograph Collection","hits":4956},{"value":"John E. Phay Collection ","hits":4706},{"value":"John J. Herrera Papers","hits":3288},{"value":"Baldy Editorial Cartoons, 1946-1982, 1997: Clifford H. Baldowski Editorial Cartoons at the Richard B. Russell Library.","hits":2607},{"value":"Sovereignty Commission Online","hits":2335},{"value":"Strom Thurmond Collection, Mss 100","hits":2068},{"value":"Alabama Media Group Collection","hits":2067},{"value":"Black Trailblazers, Leaders, Activists, and Intellectuals in Cleveland","hits":2033},{"value":"Rosa Parks Papers","hits":1948},{"value":"Isaiah DeQuincey Newman, (1911-1985), Papers, 1929-2003","hits":1904},{"value":"Lillian Eugenia Smith Papers (circa 1920-1980)","hits":1887}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"John Davis Williams Library. Department of Archives and Special Collections","hits":8885},{"value":"Alabama. Department of Archives and History","hits":8146},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":4102},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":4024},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3854},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3292},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3212},{"value":"Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies","hits":2874},{"value":"Mississippi. Department of Archives and History","hits":2825},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":2633},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":2264}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":80736},{"value":"Collection","hits":455}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":80994},{"value":"true","hits":197}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}