{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_370","title":"Desegregation: Interdistrict desegregation plan and settlement agreement","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":["1989"],"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 integration"],"dcterms_title":["Desegregation: Interdistrict desegregation plan and settlement agreement"],"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/370"],"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\nJuly Submission Settlement Plan Interdistrict/Settlement Agreement #4 J*?the f.ll \u0026lt;lh-n, 1989 Minnn  Substantially finalized in February of 1989. Minor revision occurred thereafter. The parties extended by up to three in the text of '\"ferred to xt of the plan be extended by up to three voane ( on orm to the originally proposed schedule of compliance. INTERDISTRICT DESEGREGATION PLAN February IS, 1909 SP-01023 01716INTERDISTRICT DESEGREGATION PLAN February 15, 1989 1. Introduction 2. Overview 3. Interdistrict Desegregation Plan Student Choices and Options 4 . Summer School 5. Staff Development 6. Multl-Dlstrlct Desegregation Plan School Operations 7 . Library Media 8. Special Education 9. Vocational Education 10. 11. Guidance and Counseling Program Parent Involvement/Communlty Linkages SP-01024 01717INTRODUCTION The goals of school desegregation planning must he clearly focused and well understood. It Is Insufficient to establish as a single goal the physical movement of bodies and the rearrange- ment of boundary lines. An educational environment whlc.h encourages and provides academic and human growth for ail students based upon their individual needs and talents must also be a goal of any adequate desegregation plan. The parties hereto seek to ensure that the schools and learning experiences throughout the school system are organized so that school practices, policies and procedures prevent unfair treatment or denial of opportunity for any child because of his or her racial, economic status or cultural identification. Immediately following this introduction. the parties have Included an overview which sets forth their mutual understanding of the basic tenets and bases for compromise they consider essential to an interdlstrlct desegregation plan. Supporting that overview, the reader will find a series of documents prepared by committees composed of representatives of the parties. The committees met over a period of weeks to discuss and come to agreement on the interdlstrlct desegregation aspects on assigned subjects. There were four (4) main committees which were devoted to the following areas: 1) student assignments\n2) programs/academics\n3) community and board development\nand. 4) school operations. The student assignment committee also had oversight responsibility for the other committees. SP-01026 01718HI The committees submitted their reports to the oversight committee (Student assignments) which in turn submitted all of the reports to counsel for the various parties. Counsel have now refined and revised those reports as well as produced the following overview. Finally, this document represents the work product of the LRSD, PCSSD, NLRSD and Joshua Intervenors. Because of the circumstances unique to the NLRSD and its desegregation plans, the NLRSD cannot agree to participate in all of the programs. procedures or policies set forth in this document. The NLRSD, however, has agreed to participate in those programs and efforts where the NLRSD is specifically identified by name but only to the extent that the language 13 specifically related to the NLRSD. The mention of NLRSD by name in one sentence or paragraph does not imply that the NLRSD is Included in preceding or succeeding sentences and paragraphs. Terms such as \"multidistrict\". \"the districts\". \"districts In Pulaski County\", \"the parties\". \"trl-distrlct\" and other generic terms, do not include the NLRSD unless the NLRSD so chooses. The NLRSD does not, however, object to LRSD and PCSSD implementing these proposals within their districts, provided they do not negatively affect the desegregation plan of the NLRSD. The NLRSD will consider the programs, and may, subject to the consent of the parties hereto, participate In additional specific programs when the NLRSD determines that such participation would be beneficial to the NLRSD and its students. SP-01027 01719OVERVIEW I. Ob1ectlves\nThe objective of the parties is to develop and implement a comprehensive desegregation plan for school districts in Pulaski County. Such desegregation plan shall be based upon the following principles: A. All schools (students and faculty) should be racially balanced within goals reflective of previous applicable court orders and approved desegregation plans except as otherwise provided in this Plan. B. There will be established Interdlstrlct Schools which shall seek to obtain a ratio of between 60% and 40% of either race with the ideal goal of these Interdlstrlct Schools to be 50% black/whlte. Proposed Interdlstrlct Schools shall be phased-ln to these ratios over time. The establishment of Interdlstrlct Schools and the method by which the seats of those schools are filled will allow for the desegregation of the Incentive Schools (to be discussed herein below) in an orderly and timely fashion as well as allow for the desegregation of the other schools in Pulaski County. II. Interdlstrlct Schools: There shall be Interdlstrlct cooperation in developing the thematic programs at the Interdlstrlct Schools. Responsibility for operating and managing Interdlstrlct Schools shall rest primarily with the host district. subject to coordination and cooperation among the parties with respect to such matters SP-01028 as 03 01720recruitment, theme selection. transportation, and other matters whlch are relevant to the interdlstrlct character of the faci- llty. Six (6) new Interdlstrlct Schools will be established in the near term: A. Baker 1989-90 B. Harris 1989-90 C. Romine 1989-90 D. Stephens 1990-91 E. Crystal Hill area 1990-91 F. King 1992-93 Facilities considered for construction or establishment in the future may include in or near Chenal Valley and the Scipio A. Jones site. The Interdlstrlct Schools shall be populated primarily by black students from LRSD and by white students from PCSSD or beyond Pulaski County. PCSSD and LRSD will engage in early, rigorous and sustained recruitment efforts designed to maximize participation in all Interdlstrlct Schools. III. Incentive Schools: There shall be a limited number of Incentive Schools, for a period of at least six years, sufficient to accommodate that number of black students who, by attending these schools, make it possible to achieve a student population in the remaining Little Rock schools (Elementary Academies) of 55* black and 45* white with a variance of 5*. The recruitment of white students to SP-01029 04 01721these Elementary Academies may Increase the percentage of white students In these schools to a maximum percentage of 60%. The Incentive Schools shall be: Franklin, Garland, Ish, Mitchell, Rightsell, Rockefeller, Stephens and Washington. The Incentive Schools will be desegregated in phases through a combination of white recruitment into the Incentive Schools, and by a reserving designated number of seats in each Incoming kln- dergarten class for the enrollment of white students. As new Interdlstrlct Schools are established those seats attributable to LRSD will be available for those students who otherwise would or could have been assigned to an Incentive School\nany recruitment and/or any assignment shall be in accordance with each district's student assignment plan. Funding for the Incentive Schools shall be set at two times the level for the Elementary Academies to ensure that the children who are in racially-isolated settings are provided meaningful opportunities for desegregated experlences/actlvlties. To meet that goal, the parties shall utilize the services of a consultant who has demonstrable experience in developing and successfully Implementing such programs in a majority-black educational setting. IV. Magnet Schools\nThe Little Rock District shall continue to operate the six present magnet schools. Those schools shall be racially balanced to a point of between 50% and 55% black. They shall continue to be open to students of the three districts. PCSSD, NLRSD, and SP-01030 05 01722LRSD will engage in recruitment efforts designed to maximize participation in magnet schools up to the levels set forth in the Court's February 27, 1987 Order. V. PCSSD Schools: The PCSSD schools shall have black-white ratio goal in a accordance with that district's proposed permanent desegregation plan. PCSSD. Interdlstrlct Schools shall be built and/or established by PCSSD commits to populate these and other Interdlstrlct Schools In accordance with the procedures outlined in this plan. VI. NLRSD Schools: The North Little Rock schools shall have a black-white ratio goal in accordance with its present desegregation plans. That district may educate pupils of the other two districts. If an Interdlstrlct School is placed in North Little Rock, it will be racially balanced. NLRSD commits to the exchange of students with PCSSD as described in a later section of this document. VII. Further School Construction: All school construction shall bo subject approval and shall promote desegregation. VIII. Transportation: to the court's Students shall be provided transportation in order to attend their assigned schools (Including its programs and activities ). Nothing In the transportation process will preclude a student from voluntarily choosing an assignment which requires more than a 45 minute bus ride. SP-01031 06 01723zx. Sulldlnq Quality: An alm of the plan shall be to ensure for all students equal educational facilities. Schools which are located in lower socio-economic areas shall receive attention and resources at least equal to those in more affluent areas in respective districts. X. Students Outside Pulaski County: The parties shall encourage assignment of students from outside Pulaski County to select IXLLa44etrtct Schools. Assignments shall be made under this provision only if they advance the desegregation goals of this Plan. XI. Faculty: The districts shall set recruitment and hiring goals so as to prevent Imbalance and to provide highly qualified staff to all students. The racial composition of each district's faculty ratio shall be consistent with applicable law. XII. Achievement Disparities: A. The parties shall have as a high priority the elimina- tlon of educational achievement disparities between black and white students. An instrument for initial measurement of disparity will be standardized, properly approved and/or validated tests. Each district or entity shall devise its own plan for eliminating disparities while at the same time continuing to maximize educational opportunity for all students. B. The parties recognize that the elimination of disparity may place greater demands upon the black students in racially SP-01032 (} 01724Identifiable schools than on others, and further that the nigh demand/hlgh expectation concept will target low achievers in all schools C. The districts and ADE shall evaluate all programs and personnel for effectiveness in remediating achievement disparity in accordance with any applicable policies, laws or agreements. XIII. Programs and Actlvltles: There shall be presLunptlon that racial disparity in a programs and activities in any school need not exist. where such disparities do exist, they shall be identified, analyzed for cause and shared with the appropriate monitoring authorities. A recommended course of action in remediation will then be implemented . Special attention shall be given to any Imbalance in placement into special education. honors, talented and gifted. advanced placement classes\nextracurricular activities\nexpulsions and suspensions\nand reward and punishment systems. An objective of this appraisal shall be to eliminate negative stereotyping based upon race or socioeconomic status. XIV, Monitoring\nTho districts will continue to carry out their respective monitoring responsibilities as provided in their existing and proposed plans. Each District shall make a quarterly report to the Special Master. Additionally, at the end of each year a determination of the effectiveness of each district's implementation of the desegregation plans shall be conducted by the par- SP-01033 ('Q 01725ties, subject to the court's review. To accomplish this end, the parties' monitors will be provided reasonable access to records and facilities, provided that requests for access are not disruptive, unreasonable or intrusive. XV. Housing: The parties commit to promote housing desegregation within segregated neighborhoods. The districts recognize the force of prior court findings that governmental agencies and/or private parties helped to create racially segregated neighborhoods. They pledge to work together and use their best efforts to dismantle, and prevent recurrence of, segregated housing patterns. XVI. Funding: Funding for the Intradistrict and interdlstrlct desegregation plans of the parties shall be In accordance with any underlying agreements between or among the parties, which when finalized are hereby Incorporated into this document by reference, or as may otherwise be ordered by the court. Implementation of these desegregation plans by either LRSD or PCSSD is dependent upon the receipt of additional desegregation funds through whatever means may be available. LRSD, PCSSD and Joshua state that neither LRSD nor PCSSD can implement their respective plans or the interdlstrlct plan without either approval of the settlement with the state. or Court-ordered funding from the State. Further, even if the settlement is approved. LRSD will need additional funds before It can Implement the plans. SP-01034 01726 (XVII. community Involvement: The parties are committed to ensuring a high degree of Involvement by parents, business leaders, and other patrons and volunteers within each of the districts. This Plan takes positive steps to make that involvement substantive and ongoing. XVIII. Curriculum and Programs: A joint committee will be established to review the curri culum requirements as well as the programs for the districts in Pulaski County. The committee will have at least one representative from each party in the Pulaski County school desegregation case. The committee will recommend any curriculum or program changes necessary to facilitate and/or enhance the movement of students among the districts In Pulaski County. SP-01035 01727INTERDISTRICT DESEGREGATION PLAN Student Choices and Options The parties to this proposal believe that the recent success of the Magnet Schools In the Little Rock School District as well as the real potential for expansion of the Interdlstrlct Majorlty-to-Minorlty program should constitute the fundamental building blocks upon which a multl-dlstrlct student assignment and transfer program should be built. These parties believe that these carefully crafted strategies should be further pursued and given a full opportunity to succeed before consideration is given to other assignment strategies. Preliminary recommendations are set forth below regarding the location of Interdlstrlct Schools\nhowever, with certain exceptions, these parties do not presume to suggest final themes for Interdlstrlct Schools at this time. These parties believe that such decisions can more successfully be realized by full involvement of patrons, parents, and students in theme selection. To that end, these parties propose to conduct a series of carefully drawn parent/patron public meetings and/or surveys designed to elicit public opinion and input concerning the selection of the- mes, the location of themes, and the Implementation of themes. The parties further propose that, following an analysis of the data received from any surveys which may bo conducted, a series of public meetings would be conducted to receive further comment regarding potential themes, suggestions for thematic refinement. and further input regarding theme location. The parties believe SP-01036 11 01728that this process will not only promote confidence in these expanded and new programs but will operate to generate curiosity about and enthusiasm for these expanded activities. A survey process and procedures schedule will be prepared by the respective districts for those Interdlstrlct Schools coming on line subsequent to the 89-90 school year. Those schedules will be completed on or before April 28, 1989. Interdlstrlct Schools The following Interdlstrlct Schools shall be built and/or established in accordance with the schedule and/or timetable herein: A. Baker Elementary The Immediate construction of an additional 200 classroom spaces is required at Baker Elementary to facilitate the transfer of that number of black students from the presently configured Romine attendance area to compose Baker Elementary as an Interdlstrlct School. PCSSD will obtain the white students needed for this school by assigning those whites currently attending Baker Elementary to Baker Interdlstrlct School. PCSSD will likely provide additional geocode reassignment as such assignments presently affect Baker, Lawson and Robinson Elementary Schools. Such shifting will be for the dual purpose of increasing white enrollment at Baker to compliment the recruitment of black students from Romine as well as to bring Lawson and Robinson Into as close a racial balance with each other as is reasonably practicable with the use of Baker as an Interdlstrlct School. SP-01037 1.2 01729Little Rock black students will be permitted to attend designated Incentive School for its after-school incentive program. The only presently known facility modification necessary at Harris Involves an upgrade of the landscaping. Other potential a modifications will be evaluated by the parties. PCSSD believes that a math and science emphasis would prove attractive not only to transferring Little Rock black students but also to the present student population at Harris. However, the parties fully intend to conduct appropriate parental meetings with black parents In the LRSD to determine whether or not an alternative theme or themes would be more appropriate or attractive. The targeted parents of LRSD blacks who will be recruited to Harris are not clearly Identifiable. However, LRSD will make every effort to obtain comments from parents in the general target 1989 . areas on or before February 24, The PCSSD will implement enhanced compensatory education at Harris, beginning with the 1989-90 school year. The program will be implemented in sufficient black children for whom the scope to accommodate any Little Rock program is appropriate or necessary. C. Romine Elementary Romine Is to be converted into an Interdlstrlct School. Its student population will be composed of those students from the Romine attendance zones and white students recruited from PCSSD, particularly the western sector. White students returning to SP-01039 14 01731The extended-day program at Baker will be in its third year beginning with the 1989-90 school year. That program will be expanded as necessary to accommodate the black students transferring in from the Romine area. Baker Interdlstrlct School will carry a thematic program. The parties intend to conduct appropriate public meetings or parental contact, particularly in the Romine area, to determine the appropriate theme for this Interdlstrlct School. These meetings will be completed on or before February 24, 1989 by the respective districts' desegregation office. PCSSD shall provide its full compensatory education program at the Baker Elementary Interdlstrlct School if 35 or more black students transfer from LRSD to Baker. B. Harris Elementary Harris Is to bo converted to an Interdlstrlct School. Such designation offers numerous advantages, including the fact that it is the only elementary school in the PCSSD which has sufficient excess capacity to serve an immediate significant role in the interdistrict plan. At least 200 seats are presently available at Harris for transferring Little Rock black students. Little Rock will target for Harris those black students from those areas of LRSD which will most nearly facilitate LRSD's desegregation efforts. This will include, but will not be limited to, black students in downtown Little Rock satellite zones, or students who otherwise would or could attend an Incentive School. As an added feature of the Harris program. SP-01038 13 01730LRSD will likewise be recruited to Romine. PCSSD shall engage in early, rigorous and sustained recruitment of white PCSSD students to assist In the desegregation of Romine Elementary School. Romine shall have an early childhood education program. A theme will be selected after appropriate parental meetings have been conducted. These meetings will be completed on or before February 24, 1989 by the respective districts' desegregation office. D. Stephens Elementary LRSD will build a new Stephens Elementary School operating at grades pre-K through 6 to be located near the 1-630 corridor bet- ween 1-30 and University Avenue. This school will be ready by the 1990-91 school year or as soon as reasonably practicable. These parties propose that this elementary center be constructed, owned, and operated by the LRSD and draw Its black student body largely from the students then attending the old Stephens School and its white student population, to the extent feasible, from both dependents of state government employees and PCSSD students. This school will have an early childhood program. The old Stephens School building will then be closed. E. Crystal Hill Area PCSSD will construct and operate a new Interdlstrlct School to be opened by the 1990-91 school year, or as soon as reasonably practicable, in the general area of the intersection of 1-430 and Maumelle Boulevard. This school will be partially populated by whites from PCSSD through mandatory assignment, If necessary. SP-01040 15 01732from the present Pine Forest and Oak Grove attendance areas to guarantee the requisite percentage of white students for this school. The black students enrolled at this school will be recruited from the Romine area in LRSD, from LRSD satellite zones near the Incentive School zones and those blacks who otherwise would have or could have attended an Incentive School. This school is necessary because the redesignation of Baker and Romine as Interdlstrlct Schools will not completely resolve the racial imbalance at Romine Elementary School during the 1989-90 school year. To help resolve that Imbalance, PCSSD will construct this new school. The parties project that the school would have a capacity of between 600 and 800 students. This capacity would allow the desired number of blacks to be recruited from Romine to PCSSD. In addition to the other desegregatlvo effects outlined above, this school in have the further desired desegregatlve effect of freeing seats at Pine Forest Elementary as well as Oak Grove Elementary for the further interdlstrlct (and. in the case of the PCSSD) intradistrict movement of black students to those elementary schools. Such a reduction in white presence at Pine Forest and Oak Grove Elementarles will allow new black students to bring those two schools within the final court-approved range for desegregation. Additionally, the new school and the newly available seats at Pine Forest and Oak Grove will be available to blacks who occupy scattered-site housing to be erected In those areas beginning with the 1989-90 school year. SP-01041 16 01733King Elementary LRSD will construct a new King Elementary School as a downtown Interdlstrlct School by the 1992-93 school year or as soon as reasonably practicable. These parties propose that this facility be located In the general area bounded by Interstate 630 between 1-30 and University Avenue. These parties believe that this location would serve as a natural attractor for Individuals who work within the governmental and business centers of Little Rock. A Montessori school theme will be explored for King and a committee made up of one representative from each party shall make a report and recommendation to the Court by February, 1990, after conducting appropriate parental surveys and meetings regarding the desired theme. G. Other Matters All Interdlstrlct and Magnet Schools shall be open to students who reside outside Pulaski County. This action seems particularly appropriate since many of these people work in Little Rock but live outside the county and do not presently option of attending Interdlstrlct or Magnet Schools. have the Serious consideration should bo given to the establishment of an alternative school In North Little Rock in 1909 or beyond. The parties recognize that such facility might most a appropriately be operated by the school districts. The parties will determine, by the end of the 1990-91 school year, a timetable for construction of an Interdlstrlct School in SP-01042 17 01734the Chenal valley area if such can be done in accordance with the desegregation requirements of the districts. Potential Interdlstrlct M to M Enhancements The parties recognize that additional programs and strategies need to be implemented to fully promote interdlstrlct majority- to-mlnorlty transfers. This Plan will permit the treatment of interdlstrlct transfers (including the NLRSD) where students are moving from a situation where their race is a greater proportion of the total student body of a school to a school where their race is a lesser proportion of the student body of a school as Interdlstrlct Majorlty-to-Mlnorlty transfers under the Court's Order. This type of transfer will be permitted only where it improves the desegregation of the sending and receiving school districts and doos not compromise the intradistrict desegregation plan of the respective districts. A. North Pulaski High An Air Force ROTC program, together with instructive flight simulator, shall be established at North Pulaski High School, This will require additional constiructlon at North Pulaski. The implementation of an Air Force ROTC program at North Pulaski High School could act as an Inducement for the voluntary transfer of black students to North Pulaski. B. Oak Grove/NLRSD PCSSD and NLRSD shall recruit and exchange. on a one-for-one basis, the following students (and as described In Exhibit \"A\" hereto) : SP-01043 IS 017351. Junior High schoo1s: PCSSD Oak Grove white students with NLRSD Ridge Road, Rose City and Central Junior High School black students. 2. Senior High schools\nPCSSD Oak Grove white students with NLRSD Ole Main black students. Joint Pursuit of Federal Magnet Grant The school districts in Pulaski County including the NLRSD are committed to the Joint pursuit of federal magnet grants for the operation of the multl-dlstrlct Magnet and Interdlstrlct Schools. If the districts are successful, then monies should be available in time to assist in the development and implementation of the proposed new Magnet and Interdlstrlct Schools. SP-01044 19 01736IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS . NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et. ai . INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, et. al. INTERVENORS PETITION TO MODIFY NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT'S DESEGREGATION PLAN Developments subsequent to the initial submission of the North Little Rock School District's Desegregation Plan in March, 1986 and the Supplement to the Plan in October, 1986 have resulted in some departures from the specific letter of the North Little Rock Plan as adopted by the Court in its Order of February 27, 1987. The North Little Rock School District, therefore, petitions the Court to modify its Plan in recognition of those developments. RACIAL COMPOSITION OF NLRSD SECONDARY SCHOOLS The Orders of this Court and the Eighth Circuit require that each school within the North Little Rock School District have a racial composition, excluding kindergarten. within 25% of the racial composition of the school district as a whole at that organizational level. As of October 1, 1988, however, the racial composition of Lakewood Junior High School had moved EXHIBIT \"A\"  ^0 01737 SP-01045outside of this permissible range, being 27.1% black when the minimum was 30.2% although a movement of thirteen students would correct this imbalance. still in compliance Ail other schools within the District with the 25% standard although Ridgeroad Junior High School and Ole Main High School are approaching 1imit. this On September 1, 1988, the Court approved the North Little Rock School District's request to modify its desegregation plan to permit a reorganization of its secondary schools in the 1990-91 school year which would result in Ole Main High School having ail students in grades 11 and 12, Northeast High School housing ail students in grades 9 and 10, and Lakewood, Ridgeroad and Rose City Junior High Schools housing all students in grades 7 and 8. It was anticipated as part of this reorganization that the attendance areas of the three junior high schools would be changed to equalize their racial compositions. No provision. however, was made for a school moving out of compliance before the 1990-91 school year. The NLRSD has formally requested the Magnet Review Committee and the MET to target white students at Lakewood Junior High School for recruitment to Mann Magnet and LRSD black students for recruitment to Lakewood Junior High as M-to-M transfers for the remainder of the 1988-89 school year as well as for -2- 3-OOlJ SP-01046 21 017381989-90. Since the movement of only thirteen students will achieve compliance with racial composition standards, the parties believe these voluntary measures should be successful. The parties recognize that the stability of student assignments is a critical factor in the community's support of a district and the long-term success of its desegregation plan. Therefore, the parties agree that no mandatory reassignment of students should be made to bring the racial composition of the secondary schools within the permissible range before the 1990-91 school year provided that they do not fall more than five percentage points outside the permissible limits. If such an event should occur, the parties will be notified and appropriate action, if any, will be determined and taken prior to the commencement of the academic year. In the 1990-91 school year, the attendance areas of all North Little Rock junior high schools will be modified so that each has approximately the racial composition. same To avoid the potential that any NLRSD secondary schools might move outside the permissible range, to aid in the desegregation of the other secondary schools, and to assist the Pulaski County Special School District in the effective implementation of its proposed long-term desegregation plan, the North Little Rock School District will assist the PCSSD in its efforts to recruit black students from Ridgeroad, Rose City and -3- 3-OOlJ 22 SP-01047 01739Central Junior High Schools to attend Oak Grove Junior High School on a voluntary basis. In addition, the NLRSD will permit black students from Ole Main High School to attend the senlor high school at Oak Grove provided no transfer negatively affects the desegregated status of any NLRSD school and that said transfers do not result in a loss of revenue to the NLRSD. North Little Rock will also accept the transfer of white students from Oak Grove Junior and Senior High Schools to Ole Main High School and Rose City, Ridgeroad and Central .lunior High Schools under these same conditions. Further, the parties desire that any shifts in the racial composition of schools that might fall outside the Court-approved standard be identified and addressed before the beginning of a school year. To this end, the North Little Rock School District agrees it will prepare an estimate of the anticipated school enrollment of each of its schools on or before July 1 for the coming school year. If it is determined that any school is within two percentage points of the limit approved by the Court, the Court and other parties will be notified and appropriate action, if any, will be determined and taken prior to the commencement of the academic year. SOMPA At page 7 of North Little Rock's March, 1986 Plan and page 8.1 of the October, 1986 Supplement to the Plan, the District -4- 3-OOlJ SP-01048 01740 23proposed the use of the System of Muitipiuraiistic Assessme nt (SOMPA) as an alternative test for intellectual ability in Identifying students for its special education and gifted and talented programs. Subsequently, however, the Arkansas Department of Education denied the use of SOMPA as an alternative test of intellectual ability in the special education area because the test was not normed nationally but only on the basis of California students. In the gifted area, SOMPA was used but it was found that the Torrence Test for Creative Positives and the use of multiple placement criteria were more effective in identifying minority gifted students than SOMPA. Therefore, because of the questionable applicability of the test. the expense of its administration and the fact that alternatives in the gifted field have proven more effective. the parties agree that the North Little Rock School District should not be required to use SOMPA in its special and gifted education programs. CANTALICIAN STUDY - ALTERNATIVE INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES At page 7-8 of its March, 1986 Plan, the NLRSD committed to implement the six alternative instructional practices recommended by the Cantaiician Foundation in its report in 1984. Three of these practices have been implemented -- DISTAR, Peer Tutoring and Computer Assisted Instruction. The contents of the Exemplary Center for Reading Instruction (ECRI) and -5- 3-OOlJ SP-01049 1 01741Adaptive Learning Environment Model (ALEM) have been implemented through other programs although not necessarily in the form specifically described by the Cantaiician Foundation in its report. The parties recognize that the purpose of the Cantaiician Report was to provide school districts with exemplary programs which could be adapted to each district's curriculum and needs. It was never suggested that the programs could be effective only if implemented exactly as described in the Report. Thus, because the North Little Rock School District has adopted various programs such as PACIR, TESA and Classroom Management as well as DISTAR and Computer Assisted Instruction which implement the educational content and elements of ECRI and ALEM, the District has acted consistent with the intent of the Cantaiician Report. Therefore, the parties agree that the North Little Rock School District should not be required to implement the Adaptive Learning Environment Model and the Exemplary Center for Reading Instruction alternative practices except as is being done through other programs, attached). (See Exhibit A The sixth proposed alternative instructional practice was Precision Teaching. This has been very effective in teaching the profoundly handicapped but even the Cantaiician Foundation warned that there was as yet no evidence of its efficacy in teaching non-handicapped students. The North Little Rock School -6- 3-OOlJ SP-01050 01742District has made several attempts to obtain information regarding the effectiveness of this method in teaching non-handicapped students but has been unable to obtain such information. The District will continue to seek this information but the parties agree that the North Little Rock School District should not be required to implement the Precision Teaching Model as an alternative instructional practice until such supporting data is forthcoming. The District will assess the use of Precision Teaching when data is supplied supporting its efficacy for non-handicapped students. DALLAS PRESCHOOL SCREENING TEST At page 4.3 of its October, 1986 Supplement, the NLRSD committed to administer the Dallas Preschool Screening Test to all kindergarten children at the first of each school year. Subsequently, we are informed the Dallas School District, which pioneered this test, has found it to be ineffective and has ceased using it. The North Little Rock School District has, therefore, replaced it with the Early Prevention of School Failure Test which is also being used by the Little Rock and Pulaski County Special School Districts. The parties agree that the North Little Rock School District should be permitted to the Early Prevention of School Failure Test in lieu of the Dallas Pre-School Screening Test. use -7- 3-OOlJ SP-01051 01743CONCLUSION The Joshua Intervenors and other parties do not necessarily agree with every factual statement in this Petition but do concur in and support the proposed modifications to North Little Rock's desegregation plan. Respectfully submitted, JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 3400 TCBY Tower Capitol at Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 375-1122 72201 February , 1989 By\nUj- STEPHAN W. JONES, Attorney for North Little Rock School District JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 374-3758 72201 By\nLJA^ZZAARR W PALNICK? At Joshua Intervenors WRIGHT, LINDSEY 6 JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 371-0808 72201 By\nM. SAMUELyJONES, Attorney for Pu^ski Oounty Sg^ial School DiatrLex ski -8- 3-OOlJ SP-01052 01744 \\ , Attorney fo?'^'. The undersigned parties do not object to this modification. By: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION By: KNIGHT INTERVENORS By:_ -9- 3-OOlJ SP-01053 '2 01745 A ccm?ar:sos O SIX a.:: SY THS CATAL :r\nat:ve\nc:a.n fc: TATIC: :al ??a:t\n:e3\nz.\n:9SL) TO E.X.S' P3AC7 IS THE SC STH LT : SOCK sc:-::i DISTRICT PRKRAMS VI '^3 U I 13 5 c a CO u ai , 3 IV) Qi'? o ei e Is h I O w 1 e. e o 0 I u 9 V) CATALICIXN FOUNDATIOS'S RECO.'ClISOED ALTCINATIVE ISSTRUCTIOSAL PRACTICES ADAPTIVE LEARNTXC OnTROIXEKT I COEL \u0026gt; Adaocs laaraiat anviroaeanc co ' individual ntadto B Provides taehnlcal support to tlassrooa caachars. SCudtnc iadividuAl difftraacts dttcribad la cams diraecly ralacad co lascruccioa. EXCIPLAAY CEaSTU READING INSTKUCTTOM Elicxca corraec raipoasas from Qoa-raipoodia| scudaacsa E*cbllxhd uicacy Itvals Tint for suparrlitd praeclea. Cocrtlactd lia(ua|a art* acclvlelta. Effactlva managaaanc t aonltoring systaa. DISTAi DLiaet IniCTuecion. Scudaacs aysccaaecleaXly aova chrougb saquanead Bacart\u0026amp;ltd Oafintd ccachlst babavlors vich a focus. Cltacly tpselfltd goals. Rapld/hlgb tact of scudsnc itspoosas. Imdlaci acadsale ftadbaek. Ttaehsr concrols, solaces, and pacas ccevura assisted ihstxuctiob Skills caugbe ebrougb Indlvlduallasd Inscrueclon using CAI curricula. PEEX TtrTOlIKC Scudancs asslsclng ochar atudancs In acadaale ralacad acclvltias PXCCISIOa TEACHIMC w U ee t  o  \u0026amp; u e. 3 u o e. a Vi 8 . V.. e I u wi o c C hl-  '**1 W M I U u wt a 9 u a e o a o e U  9 (Z)  u (Z) u 8 8 S. 21- (2 SI c a 4 s X X X X z X X e e \u0026lt;9 O o u o wt u s 0 it s t a \u0026lt; o OK. O 9 9 a o o \u0026lt;Z) o 0 tj (Zl  e a o U 9 a 8 u J u e * 22 Cl m I a (0 e a e a V)  X X X X X X X z X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X z X z X X Z X X X X X X X X z X X X X z z z X z z X X X X X X z X X X X z X X X X X z X X X X Z I I  I o O tn 1^ - - 29 ' EXHIBIT A EITICACT RLSrARCH KOT AVAILABLE 01746SUMMER SCHOOL Programs for remediation and enrichment will be offered during a six (6) week summer session. LRSD will create a special summer school for a select number of students with achievement deficiencies in reading and math. Student eligibility for this free program shall be based strictly upon deficient assessment during regular school year. LRSD expects a maximum participation of approximately 500 students in grades one through twelve. The pupll/teacher ratios and other support programs shall be similar to regular year programs which address the same concerns. Summer Learning Program (8th Grade Remediation Program) The Summer Learning Program will be Implemented for those students who fall to obtain mastery on the Minimum Performance Test administered by the Arkansas Department of Education during the spring of 1988. The program will operate for six weeks and will provide remediation. In accordance with Arkansas Department of Education guidelines. in the areas of reading, English/ language arts, mathematics, science. and social studies. Students will receive instruction only In the Identified area(s) of need, with instruction being provided In three-week modules. A student may receive extensive remediation In one area for six weeks or assistance In two areas with three weeks concentrated on each area. The Summer Learning Program will have a projected enrollment of 500 eighth grade students and a teacher-pupil ratio of 1:20. SP-01055 30 01747Little Rock School Dlstrlct/JTPA Literacy Program Effective the summer 1907 the students (ages 14-21) certified to participate in the Summer Youth Employment Program must be assessed in the areas of remediation Instruction. reading and mathematics and provided The Little Rock School District has submitted a proposal to the city of Little Rock, JTPA and Private Industry Council for approval. The proposal was developed and submitted in accordance with Little Rock School District and Job Training Partnership Act Program guidelines. Extended Year Services (Handicapped Students) The Little Rock School District recognizes that to meet the responsibility of ensuring that all handicapped students receive an appropriate public education. some handicapped students may need to receive special education and related services that extend beyond the regular school year. Most handicapped children. like their nonhandicapped peers, benefit from school vacations\nhowever, for children who have limited recoupment capacity, a break In programming may bo detrimental rather than beneficial to the overall learning The purpose of the extended process. year program is to prevent regression relative to previously-learned skills which cannot be recouped in a reasonable length of time when assessed and/or demonstrated recoupment capacity Is present. The extended year program provides for an extension of the programming from the regular school year, as identified In the lEP. SP-01056 31 01748Areas of Collaboration Cooperative planning for summer school with the Pulaski County school districts should be scheduled for early 1989. Students In all districts, including NLRSD, will be better served if the Districts coordinate, with respect to summer school, the following: -locations -dates -curriculum offerings -purpose: enrichment vs. remediation -fees/fundlng -transportation -eligibility Since all three districts. Including NLRSD, offer summer school for grades 9-12 on a tuition basis, mutual planning to determine locations. dates and curriculum offerings would be beneficial for all Invovled. Principals, counselors and teachers in all area high schools should be provided with these summer school options for students. The school districts will collaborate on summer school programs for elementary students and will coordinate and share programs where feasible. In addition to offering remediation assistance to students In grades 1-8 on a tuition basis, plans are being formulated for a tuition-free summer program for primary children to provide early intervention strategies for students recommended for grade reten- SP-01057 32 01749tlon. It Is also anticipated that a tuition-free summer enrich- ment program for educationally disadvantaged students in grades 1-8 will be provided. Tuition-free remediation will bo provided for students who fall the eighth grade MPT. All other summer programs will continue to be self-supporting or funded through external resources. The LRSD has received and will continue to solicit the assistance of the business community in providing scholarships for elementary students who are recommended for summer school remediation. V Expected Outcomes By the summer of 1993, it is anticipated that a comprehensive equitable county-wide summer program will be offered for students in Pulaski County. Evaluation and Monitoring Summer school enrollment will be evaluated/monitored according to grade level, gender, subject area and race. Progress/fallures will be monitored according to grade level, gender, subject area and race. Clinical supervision will be provided for teachers. Summer school staff members will complete a questionnaire at the end of each summer. SP-01058 33 01750FOR TRANSITIONAL PURPOSES WE HAVE INCLUDED DATE ADJUSTMENTS TO ALLOW FOR TIMELY IMPLEMENTATION INTERDISTRICT SUMMER SCHOOL SP-01059 /U(| A oiiiujivi\nI 2. i. tiUHdliiM* Si liHU I III i dent i f y elementary and secondary siiihiiier school sites Io advertise for, interview, and select sunnier school administrative staff Io develop propiised Siiiuiier school budgel -o,'4 QI .. \u0026lt;43 to  .4a \u0026lt;xi \u0026lt;43 in 63 I O O CJl o I. I I.? 2.1 3. I 3.2 3. 3 li H II I.  1 I...I Kll'lllli ..HI iiiiij lui: uii.il 1. lu i .aIci.cut suaiuer. sclicicil olloM11 III\n/Al.11V11 ii Work witli .u..i..er SibunI Cuur-dinators from titR, I'l.SSD, and IR to obtain  ecoiu.cinlatiun for elen.entary and seiondar, sites. Meet with lucdl building administrators to discuss the procedures. lOncerns, expectations, etc., for use of the identified buildings. Delevop job announcements fur interview Conduct sniii.ipr school joti interviows. Obtain I'Itlll sui.n.ei Sili(JU I budget balance fro lee t 1'3119 suiiii.ei siliUul program anil budgetary needs Investigate alternate fundin. sources for sunnier school 111 J\nii\u0026gt;.-iiic.\nllVli. Det emher-1, 1968 lanuaiy 3 dahuary-19, 1989 February 19 February 22, 1969 Hji cti t\n- liJti^l Hjicti 3\n-f983 Hllillli\niiAii\nbeeeit.ber-22, 1968 lan^ry 22 January 26, 1989 februjry March 16, 1989 Harcli 23-,-196'. Hdicli 23-. i98* ill.' h.:i, 1 111 1 117 hivisiahs-tif'Cum-eulum- dNd-Sehaals Ediicatiun.il Programs blVtSIUh-Ul-SthUols Di vi sItoh-wf-f urrI - Eulurn-and-Scheels Educational Program\nbivisiuhs-uf-tui ri- Eulum-and Schesls Edbcationjl Proyrji.is SAuiitpiipinoi itI Services IVAIIIAllH'l Records aiid/or finished puuknts will be on file for vi-r i f ic.it lon/eval nat ion of siiiuci.r schuul teachers. lulls fur fdL I 1 11 les Distribution of job annuidn i iueiits Interview schedules henelup bui]iji\nt K_ MitA Siiiiiiit'i IltlLl 1 Gu d L 1: _ (cuatiniutii)---------- OlUI-jCTTVIi 4 . fo identify summer school program dates ST-la-identify-tFanspar-needs- far-summer-sehu I (Hetrepalitan) Io plan for qua 1ity instruction in sunniei school a .AJ cu m   c. IM o w hO I O O 01 4.1 4.2 K ijc.i) i45.u\nkh.ai iixi riA/i itirma SlKAlljJ 1 K/ACr 1V IT 1 t.'i Coordinate dates with Suntvei school coordinators fiom NIR and PCSSD Submit proposed dates to (1) Plant Services. (2) Executive Staff, and (3) Board of Dircc tors for approval St I-Est imale-nawber-at-buses-and est-f8F:HetrepelitaH-suit*ef sehael-site Brstuss-Posstble--EBH-Pass-wi th-6Af 5.J Develop and implen\u0026lt;ent siiiiner school job announcements (in and Out of ERSD) 5^ Interview suiiiuer school applicants HEhllffllNC DATE Bet ember - 15 1988- In effect Mare\u0026lt;-I\n-I9g9 March U\n-I989 April )O!-I989 WICX) TIHH.IHL S.^ Notify teachers to be employee May 1,-1989 ENDUIG DA It Beetmber-22\n1988- O'ilQl.Q'J Hdrth-2J.-' March 29\n-I9g kK'.HXISinil.riY Dtvlaiohs-of-Burr*- Eulum-and-Sthaels Ed^ation^l Programs BivisioHs-af-Eurri-fcolb+ aRiJSthaals yucat iona 1^ Prpgr^im Di ret tor-af - Iranspur tatibHi-BIreetar ef-Veealiaaal Edotalien Breelar-of-Persanne Human Resources April 28i-19Hi Suiiiiier School Admin- May 9i-1989- islrators\nDirector of Personnel Human Re^ices\nContent Area Supervisors LVAIJbVUlXI Firidt dates Submission of d.ites tst tmaled-tbSl Job aiinouiiceiiieiit s Interview schedule Notification letters I_ II i\u0026gt; I.I..H.1 i..:i ll.-Ji lIliHIU \u0026lt;\ni I Illi I IM. AHI A (.0,11 I : Simii.er Schuul (c^nt inued) IllillJ.'l IVI'.', 6 1(1 .uleiJiidUj ly stuff and su|)|ity suKiier 6 I\niK\\iii,U'. //i.'l I'.'i i 11.. i'.i., 1 liil I ill 1 liAll-iiiiiiii.: daie: I i: j\\'i'i..liill I iV I VAUiAi u -\ni school -a Al cu m a  ID A* ISO cn W XJ I o o a\u0026gt; to I.leiillfy sUli....er s, lii.ol '.tafi evaluation protedures 6.2 Revise and print teather hand- Outs 6.3 Provide scuinier school contract to employees 6.A Provide inservice fur sunu.er school staff 6.5 6.6 April \u0026lt;i5-)yH9 Hay 8i-19119 Hiy it),-1989 lune 1989 April Huy 29,-1989 June 2,-1989 provide clinicdl supervIsion and mon I tor inij of program I'leiilify and secure n.jteri,ils, texts, and eguipmenl needed for junior hitjh and senior high level pro(|rani 6.7 Complete sunnier school evaluation report 6.8 Provide a comprehensive sunnier school report to the LRSD Board of Directors June 1989 June 1989 August 19, 1989 Augus t August 1989 September 28 1989 Siiiiii.ei Silii.ul Aj.iiin-istraturs\nDirector of Personnel lliiman Resources SdlliC- iiS iillUVC Director of Persenne thmi^n Resources Division of Cun i-culum. Sunnier School Ad.i.inistrators Suni..er Sihool Admin-istrat. iis DivislOH-af-Schuuls-, School Administrators Educational Program's Suiiiner School Adiiiin-istrators\nEinancial Services Support Servites Eva lii.it lull Iles I'ln Pl lilted iii.itei 1.11 s Sign cuiitidcis Inservice di|eiid.i Pl irif ipa I s ' miles Rece I ve ii.jtcr ia 1 s Complete report Suliiiiitled report AUt A Hr 11 |.|..Ia.I.II lid i'l/itl Uli'inu. iCKJ Tiiin.iiii\nSijliiiik'i biluiol Ql^l*! ! : (Coiit ifiijcil) (iiiiu.Tivi.\n. :\nii\naiti\nii.\n/a\u0026lt;:iiviiii., liEj.lllilliA: liAli\nujiiiia\niiAii\nr.i? iuisiiiii 1 lY hv.\\iiiAri(d 7. Ill define the scope of the curriculum for the elementary and ary prograiiis. serond- 7.1 Hall notices to supei visors requesting recoinnendat ions lor summer school courses Noveoiber 3\n1988 November 38\n1988- Blvlbiun al  Lari- ita-lam Educat lulial Programs Nut l(e:\u0026gt; n.Jl li il y.2 Invite proposals for luin.icr school enrichment courses 7. J Pl art cooperatively with suiivuer school coordinators 7,4 Hake each district's offerings available to principals and counselors in all three districts 7^ Plan lor Bliver Education Program 7J) Identify and print each cuuise to be offered tor summer school No.eOibcr 3, 1988 llci-emhtr 1\n1988- April t\n-l)89 March Ii-1989 March 18i-1989 November 38\n1988 Becember 22\n1988 Hay 3\n-1989 March 9\n-1989 April 1\n-I989 Blvislofl ol tarrI-- fcalam Educational Programs Bivision nl Cum-eulbin tducat lonal Programs bivisicn-of-tam-- ealom Educational Programs Blviatnii-ol-tam-e a I amEducallonal Programs Support Services Bl V IsIuH-af- Carr 1 - ealaffi Educatlonal Programs AiiiiouiK.enieiilk  lid Couperjl) vL* pljii\\ Lists of offtriiiijs Action plan Course olferinijs fv tn o ro ho C U) I o o 01 Q k. 7.7 Plan and institute summer school media/advertising April 1\n-1989 May 2I\n-1989- bl visinn-oi-Lorr I - ealam Educational Programs Puhi Icily Alii A IK:.Il l.l.'.! I'lAli IllilJlU] J 1 iiHJ iin: Si ilhllH 'I b' iipy! Giiiil I: lull'll HIM-Ey) (iiiiH.'i ivu\n/. (i:i)iiHnueil) 8. lu impruve the ideiiti- 1 H dliuii 01 and iioti - I icat lull for students lu attend summer school T3 o\u0026gt; iQ ID ixi' I\\3 oi CiJ w fl I o O 01 iPv\nii-,Arn:ii.'./Ai:i ivi 1 ii\n, 7 .a He.elup 111 1.1111119 the (lire 1 uiitciit ioi lalh ol Ihe course uf feriiiijs Z.Share curriculum expeclal luus with sunmier school staff a. I hevelup suiuiici' school financial procedures ^.2 bevic-M appl icat lun/nul 11 ical lull procedures and course ulferirijs Hl th pr 1 lie I pa Is 8^1 He\nlew appl ii al luii/liut 11 leal luii prui.ediires and course ollerings Ml th cuunselors 8,4 Revise diid dislriliule Suinnii.-r school applications lu the individual schuuls 8^ Ailvei 11 Se it hul ai Shlpi 8^ Revise and prim student handbouks 111., I Illll ml HATE April l\n-lu89 Julie 19b9- March 1\n-1989 Hal ch 2U\n-1989 March 20\n-1989 llllilhi\nDAIK May 31\n-1989 Jure 20\n-1989 April 1\n-19H9 March 24,-1985 March 24,-1985 I ^..||.:l:,lhll I lY Subjei-l Al i a Super VI .UIs bivIston-of-torri-- ealam fdiical lonal ProijrairSj Summer Sihuul Ad.iiin-islralurs, Uivisibn-of- tuFricdlu-iiaHd Stheols f iranc iai Services\nand tducatluiial Pl udi aiiis Same as ahu.e Same as al-uve I.VAlllAI 11XI Coilleiil di ea ijiilili\n\u0026gt; Meeliiuj ajerJa filial [Il III' ediiitb Hetllii'j dijeiiJa Heeliii.j di|eiiJa March 20\n-1989 March 24\n-1985 March 80,-1989 March 24\n-198 Hay 8\n-1989 Hay 29\n-1989 blvlbioh-nl-Sthool5 tducat Hindi Pruijrams bn I 51 nil nt  School a {flueatluhdI PriHjramb Sunmier Schuul Adiiiiii- I slrdli.ib UlStrihul lull ut a|i|il II al lidic Allver 11 sc-iiii'iils llev 1 bed halidhiiul Ahl A Uc.l) ItXI IlAJI IlUUni Ullll-IUK Suiiiiicr Sttltol Godl 1: (continued) oiDiiJlVl\n, it. (i iiiit inued) 9. Io improve student evaluation procedu res 10. Io refine summer o, m lO  2 IM cn Ui hO I O O 01 cyi .VniAlHill.-./ACi IVI'l 11., a.7 Receive all stu.liiit app 1 ica t luii fornis and fec-s fro.i, local schools a.a Conduct Sumner school legist-trat ion 11.9 Conduct LAIC registration 3.1 Odvelop program form and evaluation procedures 10.1 Establish grading procedures (recording and reporting) I).2 Establish registrar procedures for recording and averaging Sumner school grades for permanent record 0.3 Determine needs and request JTPA Summer workers ID.4 Determine how records are to be stored uu.iiihiia: ljy 1j/ 19i-1989 lune 1989 lay 1989 lay 8,-1989 lay 8,-1989 Hay-8-,-1989 Ongoin May 1989 Hllillli\nIVUK June 1989 June 1989 .June 1989 June 1989 Jay 18i-1989 '\u0026lt;ay-18\n-1989 lay-18,-1989 As long as funding and program are available June 1989 l\nh'.iu\nMltll 1I7 Local and Sun,Iter School Adi.iinistrators financial Services Sumner School Adnlin-istraturs\nfinaneiai Services Sanie as above Same as above Sumner Schuul Administrators Regular and Sonnier School Registrars\nData Processing Sumner School Administrators BivisleH-ef-Seheels, Programs\nFinancial Services I.VAIIIAI Kh'l ionus/fees tollecled School/course regisirdi um School/course registration School/course registration final (Ji'ocedures final procedures identIfied needs Procedures identified STAFF DEVELOPMENT MULTI-DISTRICT COLLABORATION PLAN The staff development departments of the school districts. including the NLRSD, will meet a minimum of four times per year. twice each semester, to discuss and consider common staff development concerns. This multi-district committee will plan and implement staff development strategies that will provide training that addresses the commonalty of staff development concerns that the districts have. SP-01066 40 01757FOR TRANSITIONAL PURPOSES WE HAVE INCLUDED DATE ADJUSTMENTS TO ALLOW FOR TIMELY IMPLEMENTATION STAFF DEVELOPMENT SP-01067 I HUI 1)1 :iliiU_GAHiiU Mi .H-il UI Al lUU I IKI I Illi.  'll   -1 al t|m|-wiiI- HUI Tl-dlSTHICl COlLADORA!I OU PI AU .-I. .1 -. I Hir lli'f If IH t tHI- I it-.uidl ibK*,lihi -IfiijUi f * ftUi Hi Mi I- k.UH (- 4  btt c! T jr.c I .!i A': u! i 1i !l I. IlG Ii-i ( IHlI'l { I HUI HAU C'ILD Plsriiir.luii ID I J M Ilf I Kill .1 \u0026lt;'l.iif ilcv(i|\u0026lt;\u0026gt;|inri I I IfP C(T1|MISC\u0026lt;I til sriilalives Inn SClkUll TJ iliiiiinini (i( fiMir ) nieeliiigs |\u0026gt;er year will Ie |M.-Id, (wo (2) eacli seraeslcr. July, 1991 Staff Oevelopmenl DlrecLors of the Di st r icls duelling aii.ilv'' (i iin iici-ils nsscs:.iiMii( (hif\u0026gt;,iiiiig 0 I ids , Dee's fiNKl ion l Io ideiillfy iii|\u0026gt;lnncnl stall iDliieiil slralrgies will assist live r iota illtlliiig lie Ini ions o| inlng igiallly .regaUxI scliool IDs. -O m lO  o tn 00 0 nJ I O O O) 00MULTI-DISTRICT DESEGREGATION PLAN SCHOOL OPERATIONS General cooperation among the Pulaski County Districts is necessary. A collaborative effort Is crucial to the success of this countywide desegregation plan. We commit ourselves to the following: I. Underlying Principles * All students will be accorded equal opportunity to participate In all academic and extracurricular programs and services in the districts\n* All district staff and parents will develop and model high expectations for the success of all students without regard to gender or race\nAll students, all staff and all parents will have equitable access to and input into programs, school and district activities, planning and Implementation of school plans and goals\n* Special efforts will be concentrated on increasing parental involvement in the schools\n* Staffing and staff recruitment will reflect student need for contact with minority teachers and a diversity as the racial makeup of support staffs consistent with applicable law\n* Staff assignments will be made on an equitable basis\nPolicies directed toward students will reflect an awareness of diversity in the student population, its background and learning styles, while also providing for an orderly, supportive learning environment\nV: 01759 SP-01069FOR TRANSITIONAL PURPOSES WE HAVE INCLUDED DATE ADJUSTMENTS TO ALLOW FOR TIMELY IMPLEMENTATION MULTI-DISTRICT PLAN SCHOOL OPERATIONS SP-01070 AREA 1 icai l.r\n,l\u0026gt;\ni.i b Multi ()istric^2!lB_^!!^\n2! f!PI21i92^ r.ual 1. Tu nlJEClIVt'J Appoint a st 11001 im provement council of the representatives I roir. cai h district. 1 1\njrKA'nj\nii .'i/Ai.i ivri u.-.\n. Ir.-SS Oh.j.H.j plun.-.ii. J f.,r' (letegregaticii anJ plan a.\n,.) 1 I I ,1 li/j) iniinimiATiaJ TUM-mK Liil.lisr. a ^221 l!i:R12Yi!lh'21 cation or iA.pleir.ei.tati r..\nfrjs, if any. PK.U.'NK.e: ':!!2 L niDIllG DMi\n,11111 i i'i Supc i 11.1 un.i(..|. t s anil Assotiale/Assisiant Super i ntei.'leiits for [,cstgrv\nai icn IVAI11/. 1 I. ..'I Ai,[,uii.t.:,LUl i-t 1 1.1. 11 \"O Qi CD IM l) Appo I llliliclll Ot CGHJUil lees to ileiil uilh issue specific con-cei IIS ill ar'eas of scbools and suppofl S C I V i C  s u C/) I O 2 1 (ers.,ns uitii spes-ilK e.^pui'11- v.ill rr.eet, as neeJeO. in co.t.- ir.ittees anJ resolve ongoing coordination in areas relate,! to the plan such as transportation and staff de.elop.tent 1 1 .1. i 1S.jC 1 Rctalui 1 .(I 01 1 C L S I S t .:M Supci u.lif. lent' s Hti.j l.i.u i.id .1 i i/Jl'IHi'l IHlI Fxj TiHiJ.ini: Aftt A Hili 11 H jf' J LJj r al Uil.S u?j! il I . (juiix\nrivi-.s s'ik/.nbii^./ACiivii iis\n id'^p in btOltltllliC iiVir I I et I \u0026lt;11   I   ' tlilJlNG IlAlt i\n.1 ii'.i id\n! 10 develop joint recrui l in J efforts and procedures willi particular emphasis on minority teacher lecruilment 1.1 SI..ire planning, resouicts a contacts for re. i ui tir.enl of staff, botli Cerlified an.l certified (. ,1. 111'1 etitly in effect Ongoing semiannual 1y liirc^t^r j_o liuinju Resources increase i n i:.i i...i i:, slillinj among cerliiicd tall ai.l ii.ore proper 1 ior.jl re, r suppoi I staff'- sct.l.'ili .11 ai: ..hj To sliaie the applicant pools am..ng the districts 2.1 Use teachers in ttie rtcruit-ment process Lui rent I y _ln effect Ongoing 0 lieu tul' S ^s^irces 01 llumin 2 .2 Certified and iioncer 11 f icd applicant pools will be shaieJ with the agreement to assist each other in correction of disproportionate staffing Curren^d y in effect Ongoing Resources I iluijin Propoi 1 lonal in pi e-i ntal i. ninon ty and nuijority fu.pl all staffing tategorits n 1 I n Io nioni lor d i str itnilion of staff across grade levels and support areas 3.1 1 ne pi i n. i pu 1 s mil tiC accountable to ensure equ liable distribution of ic-acliers by grade level and subject area Curre^ly_!n effect Ongu i ng Il 1 liC 1 e j I s Sia11 st 10 a 1 II. 11 1.11 .1 iij Ol IlC I r of Human Resources Assoc 1atc/Ass i slant Super i nlcndents teachers hive access lu i.-i i.ii., opportunities al all gr.i.ii levels, in all sufjjC'Cl aieas an.l in all (ft'uQi oHiS  AP, IL.nors. I..'l. etc T3 o\u0026gt; lO n\u0026gt; dlu CaJ o ID Ui 13 fO O N) AREA IK.I. MM.,Hl. 'jtl illlij.ilii. Multi bislricl Plan S, liianl bi.pi a11i.nt, Goal II: (liiiin iviii 1. (torilinueiJl To i.ltiilily studciils .lio may be iutiire teachers and to provide support programs to tllClil lu establish a joint conjiiittee to address district planning for support of students uho wish l.l become teachers -o \u0026lt; to :x) EQ 4.1 S. 1 5.2 5.3\niiG\\'ii .Ji .'H'.'li ll\n. isial.listi intuit tt.iJitis clubs in ele.T.ei.tary. junioi l.ighs Olli scnioi' l.i,]l, sct.oul'.. Hold career fairs ior stu.ler.t. Contact the business coirrr.un-ity for support Create \"contracts of intent\" to hire future teachers upon de.jrce and ccr ti I icat i.\u0026gt;ii completion provi.i,' 1 nterllsh 1 p uppui t.in 11 les f.,, students of educat ion I'.ii.iil,-Ili.,. I itiE ' 0.1' L- ii ef fee t E Au.^uSt 15119 Currently in of tect  CT, ru U) 1 o El.bllX\nDAIK Oi.goii.j Onjoir.j bn join.] Ri:.it,.Mlilll.ll'i' I'r 1 (,^ 1 pa 1 a /1 c a c liC'i's Assoc 1 u t t/A ss I stai.t Supei i iitenJents birectui' oi humin PfSOiirceS Illi t.\nui 11,1.7.111 ReSi'.ui I ts lull l.lii .j Pl 11.^ n.jls 1 '.iii' i ii.:i Inci ease ll,.- i.ui..i.-, r oi 111,1, 1 .1 ciitei in,] tl,t tcai.t,ii,,j j , oi ,\".,1,i. i. lncica*.c It,-- 1,1, OI mil, .III, students v.lio (jia,li.ate li',ii, ti,e Districts and it tin n i\nteach ti,, .1. I O W ARLA 111 iiht .\nAi HXi 1 i/Ji'iiiruiiii J Til tn Hit Hidii Qj slciC-l - LliP-ith'i'i! QUKt^ Goa) il: (continued) (liiil..TlVr\n\u0026gt; I). To cstablish a joint coiunittee for planning recruitir.ent strategies and procedures 6.1 6. i 6.3 \u0026gt;u Qi m ca (b cj GTfcMbUi-'./ACilVTlil^ Production of a Set of re-ciuilii. ent procedures and timelines to be developed jointly to increase effcc-tiveness and define ment responsibilities I c CI u I I Ocvelop d cOOpcIctiwC' d'jlC'f ment for recruitment of certified and nonccrtificd staff dith reservation of nu.T.oer of slots so that a employee categories mil ne desegregated Improve teaclier vcji l ing Condi I i'UiS to n.jintain teact.ers in llic profession liUJIilllbJ DATE Spring 1990 1991 199u HlUlliG DATE Ongoing Oibjoinj Ongoing K?\n\u0026gt;lt..l.,lllll.lli District Directors o llun^ Resources bl StI let bi I'l C 101 s of lluii.ai. Resources Snpp I -er vices and Bui Idin J I'l incipals IVMb'ub .'i Comp) Ct I on of ll.j do\noi, .i.t tfac I d 1 I d 11 os In d i I s t : I I positions con n .UI a le v.itn d1'fI ic t an I cour t apniosed gm del iiiCS loci c J1 ',11 I. I re ten I ion\n1 W 'fl I o o O' I'i^l ii .'i 1 I .'Ji'IMi'l H11 H . 'iiiai iiif. ARf A Multi bistricl SlIiJuI Uici jlMJli. I. ..H iii I . sluJeiil d i sc ip 1 iii.iiy jn.l a n .-...1 jiif.e policif. v.lmh j.l li  . . it.ilcul needs A^we]l_^s_sr.hco1 clj^te cciicei^ns ciitjH.rivi-.s 1. Establ i sh a comni ttee to study disciplinary rilles and regnlatioiis and to work to address areas of divergence 1.1 1.\nnG'xrb,il...''.'j7 ivii ii.. Ci.ii.mitce assessriiciit and cGCi-parison of policies and procedures in student Pjiidi.oGks n.xilll.lilu\n11 .n: ll.ljlllG D.AIK Omju i 16] li Alt,\n...11.11.117 i\n.Aiii\\i i.J 111 sag.jie.j.i 11 on of data related to student discipline I s tall I i th a pl otedui e tor stiai ing aeccss to disciplinary reccr ds when students transfei Qi lO n\u0026gt; a\u0026gt; co CT, CO Ui I O O J O' 2.1 J. 1 J. iiistriul |.,ipil personnel directors, identif ie 1 si tool staf fs . an 1 patrons CoiTifiletii,.T 61 tr.i i.i.l. fiGiT, II. d I s ti it IS lie-velop a set of riilcs/iuptr tat ions wPich is cunai.on to students in districts. (Spec i f ic pvnal ties r.a, vary-final penalties will t.e enforced in co.T.hOn) Review I,t stnknt dita t.i addicss issues of racial dI spar i ty 1'.. 11 e \u0026gt; .^pi' .'Uul I' ItJ lc designed Mr C6nj..unica11un of student disciplinary records wi.- n students trai.sln or are expel led/suspended li. effect ...jMih.J iiui Mil. III'. Ip.I I s BBQ ARIA llulLi-UisLiit.i I'J jii .Sclijul Qpeiiliciii jlodi 1 _____ oiK:nvi.s 4. keV lew of attendance policies to attempt to create a comaiion policy and set of procedures j. Appoint ongoing mon- 1loring commi ttee to keep policies on attendance and discipline under review and to review data 6. Develop alternative school for students in need of intervention or special assistance if \"at risk\" due to teen parenthood etc. 4.1 5.1 5.2 6.1\nn(.Anj'\nir-''./ACHvirii.s Appoint ic-fliu c.,.....iHee of patrons, staff and toard members Appoint Coramitlee Ongoing revieu of disaggregated data to address disparities and student needs Plan alternative school to be available to students on a contract basis and con-tigent upon funding availability lie.11 iH.'jiljib.Al k'.l ri/'Ji'l.'ll'lJMEl J 'rnuiii.t bujltiiill'C ii.vrE As nL.'cUc'l As needed In effect UIDIIJC DATE Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing ki.')iv'i.,ibii.ri'i' Appi'vpi 1 ate Asso-ciate/ Assistant Super Intendent from each of the districts Siipci 1 fl LL-nJenl s Principils and District Administrators Appropriate Asso-ciate/ Assistant Super 1ntendent 1 Loirijilc l lull ui '.1 IA I H '.'1 I J a\u0026gt; in fb CaJ 4^ n\u0026gt; at UI W t) I o o 01 AHEA ijc.M bril.atliiAiiixi I'l/ji-itii'iiiia\n'uii 1 ituiaia: _.Hj 11 i: Q i 5 ir i L L Elaik Sthuii LUpiiji L i Olli. l.oa 1 1 (. Id provide ITPit dViJe jjd.jiiiiiill pprrooggrraammss in guidance/OuuiiSe) ing to s toilenL UCeJi-iDlt-tQ .ensucfi -cacaai-ciiuiLy---------- oiiJtrrivhS SrKvMTi\nILS/AC117II1 i i isECTItRUGG DATE ElfOIKG DAIt REiiU-ISlBlI.iri' LVAllJAI luU 1. Hold eruployment fair for students who would enter the world of work after school 1.1 1.2 1. J 2. Provide consistent and complete information to students regarding colleges, testing, vocational schools, financial aid with specific and special concentration in access to black colleges and universities and financial aid for minority slinlenls 2.1 2.2 2.i 2.'1 funtact employers (lueal, regional and national) Hold fair with focus on employers of minori t. Target skills neede.l tor employiaent as well as opportunities Hold joinl counselin.j information sessions for counselors Contact colleges regarding minority scholarships and financial aid f.ontuct colleges legarding admissions, minority admissions Provide target counseling for minority students in effect Ongoing 2 S in.lify slurlents. p.lients. and educate stall regarding all opportunities Yearly 1 ear ly In fall, annually Lach fall Lach fall, spring Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing OnguI ng Ongoing Ol 03 ID CaJ cn n\u0026gt; OV O' C/1 hO I O O Directors of Guidance. Vocational Teachers, Director of Vocational Lduca tion Jouma 1 I sm Depar l-ments Counselors School Priiieipals Directors of Guidance Directu. j uf Gul dance w/couii ttec-of counselors Sc lidd 1 1 olihSe 1 OI s Counst l.,rs/l'rincipal Stall Gevelopn.enl Directors HtA l}\u0026lt;Sb liEblLKtGAriiXI IlAH UttTBlUfEATIOU TIHU.IHE 2!ul 11-District Plan ScbuJi Operations 3ai_J Uli .itx\nrivES S IKVlIi\n1LS/AC11V111 llbJllnlillG iiAu: DlDllX: DAIK REC\u0026gt;lv:bliin.l'iY tV.AlUAl Ki i I nlijnce minori ty r ecru I tir.ent and awareness of student of AP, honors and elective programs 3.1 I r,.l 1 V I .iiial sill.lent c.ni-ferencing . Teacher an.I c.iun-selor encouragement of anJ G.onitoring of students tn. jjinj ConnsciiH i/icaci.ers Propor tiunal minui ii, i vj.i i-i i.ial lOfi in these classes Provide pooling of resources and specific plans of intervention for students who are disadvantaged and/or at risk 11.1 1.2 Create catalogues of available intervention services Districts share inservice and contracted services to benefit students Gn.goi ng birecloi s of f.u 1 - dance75tu'dent Services Deve 1 opr.enI an.l i...(,lei..ei.la 11 oi. o strategies Develop and implement student career guidance plan with individual student educational plans and comi.iun it a I i on with parents to encourage student access to al 1 curricular and pro-graiijiialic oppoi-tunities in a ratio commensurate with school racial compos 11 ion 5.1 10 be developed and reviewed by students, parents, counselors and teachers (predicate.! on potential) In eftect Lounse 1 ..I s/ leathers Director of Guidance Dcsegregj t ion Officer Implenienlalion of rimis -a 01 03 (0 a\u0026gt; GJ CT* W nJ o o -J 00 I \\RtA iKsu i)i:,ii\ni\nii\nAibxi ri/Ji na'iimuATiai Tiina.itii: t \u0026gt;-tiistrict Plan School Operations ioal IV: (continued) lilECnVE 1 nliance communications among divisions related to counsel iinj in the districts 6.1 6.? EncAT10IP.S/ACHVli'II.S Pcjular. niohthly r.retings air.ong directors of guidance Periodic Joint guidai.ie meetings UiTTitailCC D.A'IT .ibl, ISil E31DUJG DATE Ongoing REiriA'iSilllEllY Director of Guidance Appropriate Asso-ciate/ Assistant Siiperinler.dent Director of Guidance EVAUJAi 10.'I Enhanced Services Improved Cociii.unical i .ns Lo.Tipl e-1 loll of 1aSl o u a D a-yp'( d'ci records trans fr_^ icy ere - at ion and systems y.i Appoint coiinii ttee to develop procedure and timelines of records transfer 1591-92 Directors of goi-daiice, principals, directors of pupil accountiiij f.uinpl et I oh of last inprovca.cht in Proc JO o\u0026gt; 00 w hO I O O to iREA llulli District Plan Opera t ions  DECriVti To study GPA and citi-senship participation requirements of districts to address academic requirements and student partici pa tion needs 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Iic4) ijr-'.l 1 fHrAfAl i'i.-Jl if li'iU Q ICXi lIMEI.IfiE Goa 1 V. To dt.vlop t.fuitaLle recruitment strategics, access and opportunities _ __for_all .AlUilpnts or extranirricular acliyilies P bnG\\Tlj\niL.S/ACiIVITli.S Revieu policies and percent of student participation in cavh district Review data on student par ticipation and achievement Over the last 5 years in each district Revieu racial group representation in extracurricular activities by district over 3-year period Appoint committee to evaluate results of data revieu and see if any areas of policy agreement exist DATE eudiiig DAIX Ongoing RESICiiSlbll ITi hVAHIAi io\ni Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Associate Superintendents Assouiutc Superintendent Associate Superintendent Associate Superintendent Completion of p.jliu) re\u0026lt;iL.. Revisions of policies to address student needs a Qi 03 (t\u0026gt; .Q* Xi rt\u0026gt; co CT\u0026gt; co (n hO I o o 00 o J REA iKM) nyji ufliuttJ/rATioti 'niia.niE llulli-bistrict Plan School Operations 241. V: (continuedj_____ UECriVI-LS To recrui t students for participation in academic related and athletic co-curricular activities 2.1 2.2 2.3 E\niH.-viEniE.s/ACi'ivrnt5 Teacher, parent and counselor awareness of opportunities and in turn encouragement of students Pluvide special supports of costs, recruitment, and encourageii.ent to students Reserve slots, if necessary, to ensure student participation and access in programs on a proportional Oasis iiEiJtflllO'G DATE June 1909 June 1989 June 1989 BED ING DAIE Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing REShX'iolllil.llY Principals Counselors Teachers Associate Superintendent or Designee LV,\\lJIAlli.\nl Increased student purticipation - enhanced proporti..na1ity in student participation -o Q\u0026gt; ni -c* GJ CO fO W I O O 03 REA Multi District Plan School Opeidtions .lEX-'ElVES I. Oi str ic t uniformi ty in reporting test re^ts and analyzing disparities f orm bi-racial monitoring teams to ensure appropriate test preparation and testing coiidi t ions for all students. Implement strategies to reduce disparities by means of school plans and individual student improvement plans TO LCQU ft) o rt\u0026gt; w hO I O O 00 IQ 1.1 2.1 3.1 3.2 IKSO bLSbbRfjGAUutl H7JI UQTfMUftATlOtl TIMQ-UIE Coal VI. To cnhaiice testing programs anJ student |,repai nt ion anJ access to prograg^ S'lTtAT-EGIES/AUlVlTHS DEjGItfniMG DATE Program for analysis of student Spring 1989 test results with data disaggregation to analyze disparities and student needs by race by subject area Monitoring teams composed of Planning and Evaluation Specialist and other DTstriet_gcrsonnel to mon- Ttor test preparation and test conditions for students Analysis ol school by school data and individual student needs Development of strategies to address concerns and to meet needs June 1990 Suiimer 1989 Sunnier 1969 RflilllG DATE Ongoing Ongoing ongoing Ongoing ItESTttlSKlIl.nV Associate/Assistant Superintendents Associate/Assistant Superintendents Principals Assistant Superintendents LVA1U\\T1O\nI Completion of tasi Activation of tlie monitoring coiiimi ttees Development of plans Ileasurahle decrease in disparities AREA U(SD ijEsu\nrfjga'i iixi ii/j) imiMun'A' n Tmn-iNE .Hu 11L ki ilLll_EUii-Suli!j!iL Hucr^l Goal VI\n(continued) )[1JECT IVE'S siitvresiLS/Acrivn I F.s BEL 1 till ItlG D.AIE UIDUIG DATE RESEtXiSIBll.nY EVAUhVllOil Provide services to teachers re\n'use of test scores interpretations of scores 'reporting of scores to parents interventions to benefit students (and address these specific needs 1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Joint staff development in testing Individual teacher analysis of student needs leacher preparation of strategies to address student needs School-based planning of interventions to assist students in areas of academic need leacher inservices for student learning styles, cooperative learning, and nionitoring needs of youth at risk and disadvantaged students and minority students Ongoing ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Oligo I ng Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Directors of Testing/ Evaluation Appropriate Asso-ciate/ Assistant Superintendents Frinci pa Is Prine I pa 1s State Department of Education Districts Staff Devclopn.ent Direc tors Academic improvement of all students -a Qi lO (t) aj (D ro b) I O o 00 co FOR TRANSITIONAL PURPOSES WE HAVE INCLUDED DATE ADJUSTMENTS TO ALLOW FOR TIMELY IMPLEMENTATION LIBRARY MEDIA SP-01084 M MU 01 vl J Ion: Initructlonjl Program/Area\nLIbrary Media OeJECTIVES STRATEGIES/ACTIVITIES BEG IHHING CATE LCMPLETION DATE COSTS The selection of materialsZresources to support the curriculum In desegregated school districts Is a multl-dlstrlct goal of the library media programs. Continue hosting Mu 111-D1strlct Hultl-cultural Resource Sharing annually ongoing Minimal Fair. IN THE FUTURE. THE FAIR SITE WILL ROTATE AMONG THE THREE DISTRICTS. Begin hosting Multl-Dlstrlct Resource Sharing Fair with Book and AV Materials Vendors, rotating the site among the three districts annually ongoing Minimal RESPONSIBILITY Library Media Directors or responsible person (Including NLRSD) Library Media Directors or responsible person (Including NLRSD) evaluation Resources will be selected, purchased, and utilized by teachers and students as they teach the curriculum of the desegregated school districts he Inservice training Ibrary media staff embers to desegregated chool districts Is a ultl-dlstrlct goal of he library media rograms. Plan to host multl-dlstrlct Inservice meetings such as the one sponsored by the Pulaski County Educational Service Cooperative In April of 198a to explain the new national guidelines for school library media program planning ongoing ongoing Seek Funding From Cooperative Library Media Director or responsible person Including NLRSD) Inservice training will develop skills for library media specialists who work in desegregated school districts  1 Plan to host Inservice training for multl-dlstrlct library media specialists using district eiRployees to ba established ongoing Minimal to hO I o o 03 tn \"O cu uo n\u0026gt; m czi 05 J SB Division: Prograa/Area\nInstructional Library Media objectives utilization of television technology In desegregated school districts Is a aultl-dlstrlct goal of the library aedla prograa^ llecrultaent of Minority Library Media Specialists In desegregated school districts Is a multl-dlstrlct library aedla prograas. goal lultl-dlstrlct coaaunlca tlon for library aedla irograa adalnistrators Is a goal for the rograas. I 1 cn *o Ol la (D m o tu STRATEGIES/ACTIVITIES ___ I begihhihg date lepleaent utilization of cable channel 19 and/or videotapes prodjced at Metro to teach skills, etc. basic to be established COMPLETION DATE COSTS ^5PONSIBILnirJ EVALUATION to be established Seeking I Federal Funds under Star School am Library Media Directors or responsible person Students will gain practical vocational experl- Contact teachers training Institutlons/Recrult teachers for training In library aedla cert prograas certification - Copy aeMs relating staff lovelopaent opportunitt as Lo other district adilnlstra-tors Meet Inforaally for sharing sessions ongoing ongoing ongoing Hlnleal Library Media Directors or responsible person (Including NLSD) ongoing HInlaal Library Media Directors or responsible person (Including NLRSO) c 980T0-dS [ anco In running a television studio\nstudents will benefit froa Instructional units provided over cable system or recorded for later classroom use. Hiring and placeaent Inorlty aedla will occur. of specialists Bettor communication be achieved. will SPECIAL EDUCATION I. The school districts in Pulaski County should employ stra- tegles that are intended to reduce the number of minority students enrolled in special education. Special education enrollments should reflect the district's racial populations and should be comparable to appropriate statistics in the provision of free, appropriate public education to 'handicapped students. Areas of Need: Student Identification and Placement Staffing Instructional Methodology Materials and Supplies Monitoring and Evaluation Funding for Indirect Services II. Areas of Collaboration There have been some efforts toward collaboration among the districts over the last several years. Examples Include: (1) A multl-dlstrlct committee for assessment Is In Its fourth year of operation\n(2) Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District have a written cooperative plan to coordinate In their community based Instruction (CBI) programs\npublic relations and common or shared training sites\n(3) North Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District have had a written cooperative agreement (approved by both 58 01775 SP-01087boards) to provide vocational assessment and single skill training for mildly handicapped secondary students. There is a sharing of personnel. facilities and equipment at Metropolitan High School. Other efforts toward cooperation have been less formal, such as the mutual understanding between LRSD and PCSSD on the procedure for transfer of student records from the fourteen schools transferred to Little Rock, and the mutual agreement between the directors of the three districts on the process for transferring records and attendance (for funding purposes) of special education students from NLRSD and PCSSD attending magnet schools. Based on positive results from these and other coordination efforts. It seems that an organized and expanded collaboration plan would benefit the districts. Several cooperative programs can ba established to meet the best Interests of the districts and can ba added to each district's individual desegregation monitoring plan. Areas for the districts, Including NLRSD, to explore and/or expand include: 59 01776 Sp-010882. Programs for low-incidence handicapping conditions a. Visually Impaired b. Hearing Impaired c. Mu1t1-Hand1capped d. Seriously Emotionally Disturbed Staff Development 1. a. b. c. Central Office Staff Prlnclpals/Other School Staff Teachers 3. Multl-dlstrlct assessment committee a. b. c. Establish consistent screening process Establish evaluation instruments to be used Establish consistent eligibility criteria for MR and SLD 4 . Establish process and coordination in area of recruitment of minority teachers and support staff. 5. Establish multl-dlstrlct system (forms and format) for documenting due process procedures. The directors (including NLRSD) plan to hold monthly scheduled meetings to address areas of concerns, share pertinent information, explore more areas of collaboration. and provide technical assistance where appropriate. The directors (Including NLRSD) will also look for activities that will foster cooperation and sharing such as III. writing grants to secure funding for innovative programs. Multl-Dlstrlct's Expected Outcome 1. By the 1969-90 school year the multl-dlstrlct will: A. Develop and implement programs for low-incidence handicapping conditions. B. Develop a system (forms/format) for documentation of due process procedures. 60 01777 SP-01089C. collaborate on staff development efforts in all D. aspects support of special education. activities of the multl-dlstrlct assessment E. committee. Establish a process education teachers. for recruiting minority special IV. Evaluation There is a need for a systematic approach to assessing practices and policies that yield an overrepresentatIon of minority students and males in special education. Greater demands have been made by parents. state. and national agencies vlded to for evidence of the effectiveness handicapped students. There is a of services proneed for better Information: (1) attesting to the relevance of special education (pull-out programs self-contained classes, etc.) to meet the unique needs of handicapped students\n(2) establishing the scientific significance and validity of new/exlstlng assessment Instruments , materlals/supplles and equipment\n(3) outlining the extent to which certain teacher and student behaviors are evidence of Improper or inadequate classification or placement in special educa- tlon\n(4) certifying the actual outcomes (reduction of minority students and males) resulting from the use of prereferral interventions\nand (5) providing more extensive parent educational Information systems. 61 01178 SP-01090Evaluation will be an on-going process. Central Office staff, principals, and teaching staff will be participants in the process. The Director of Special Education will have the responsibility of ensuring the initiation and completion of the process. 01779 SP-01091FOR TRANSITIONAL PURPOSES WE HAVE INCLUDED DATE ADJUSTMENTS TO ALLOW FOR TIMELY IMPLEMENTATION SPECIAL EDUCATION SP-01092 .'.t.l u J 1 r- 1 jn 19i^-9u ^^r\\,on Rcspons iblfc ( t J r I Goa 1: Dircciors - iri-Listricts Estniilis'n prcx^ess and coordination in area ot re. OBJECTIVES STRATEGIES/ activities :k\ni i: AIl'JI IJKlLII.i VTJiCulii'.. - -rait.Ticnt of minority teachers and support staff. k-'! r r ,r r !. 1 Special Iducetici. BEGlIltllNG DATE COMPLETION DATE COSTS RESPOHSIBILITY evaluation I \u0026lt;n oa I Ensure proportionate representation of cell qualified minority special education teachers Recruit and onploy minorit teachers in certified areas of: a. Mildly handicapped b. Hearing inpaired c. Moderately/severely liandicapped d. S|x\nech impaired e. Visually impaired actitdties: staff develo\njr.-nt a. Partnership with state colleges and universities for training and retraining of teachers. 1989-90 Chafing $7,000 $5,000 Tuition TO m o Ui hO I o 00 o O to u Directors: Personnel Special Education Supervisors - Special Education Professors, Special Education Department Central Office Staff Increased jxx)! of ccrcirctent minority special education teachers Af.f Ut. 1 i-ljn (i rsor. P.cSpon-Ti'blt [ji God 11 ___________________ ((tar) rectors - iri-lustricts :k\ni [ i\nji I iMii :. 11,1. Curriculiiii 1 \\ svste.n (forms and foniL:itj will Le developed for d.,\u0026lt;jr.entalion of due process procedures. r rt^,rMt/tjxci.il Lduc. OBJECTIVES STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGItlhlllG DATE COMPLETION DATE COSTS RESPOnSIBILITY EVALUATIOU 1. Ltvelop revised form.it for tri-district docerr^r.t  ation of due process. 2. Implement revised format for tri district docu\n.'ent-ali- ii of due process X) rm \u0026lt;ri I o 00 0) TJ I O O (O Is. a. Select conriittee of special education personnel from all three districts. b. Develop format for  documentation of due process c. Submit to ADE for review a. Inservice teachers ana personnel, on use of revised forms 1969-90 1991-92 Spring, 1991 OTfipilTR $30,000 for Printing Directors and Associate Directors Designated Special Education Staff I Docuneiitation will be consistent services will be provided in more timely rnreier for students i-\u0026gt; r'.ci Oojl: . .el, 1'.- H'.spon-., 1 Hr. \u0026gt; li.r.. (\u0026gt;etr, iri-i),strict i'e d' veli.:i a cg-rvin I'ru/r.r.i for stiti. OBJECTIVES 1. begin plan.-.ir.g process -Provide approiriate program for the foilcuing: a. Visual unpaired students b. Hearing impaired c. Multi-handicapjied d. Seriously Emotioiully Disturbed ai'leTeiit [iroer. nteas listld ubove.\ns l..r the I ya m on  \u0026lt;n 'U I 00 ro W hd 1 o O (O O1 . i .HjII IlMll !!.\nCiirrivul..--.   i' t.-. 1-1 tn i li.,idet.ee h-iixlicaps. STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGItlllltlG DATE COMPLETION DATE COSTS RESPONSIBILITY He ^.ecul tdui EVALUATICH .1 r.-i, I . Conduct needs assessr.en . Select a school site (s for VI, 13,.'11, \u0026amp; 31) stubii i . Sliare specialists required to meet needs of VI, 12, Ml,\nrd SED Identify ar.J carbine e.x-isting resources available . Purchase ncedeel re'- suurces uikI irateriaH . 1 ruvidu s()eciali2i.d tr.iining fcr staff . Eeorui at end sole. of perscn.al aixl/or vice providers Sir.\n^iej ni-.d .uli.iii. to 1x2 dcten.iin.\nd by Individual Education Flans (lEF's) 1989-90 School \u0026gt;ear 1990-91 Ctlgpirg To be determined. Use of local, stale, and federal furds Directors and Associate Directors of Tri-District Ejtpanded and itttproveci services to low incidence handicap[x.\u0026lt;i students. Services will be inore cost effective I I G. J Ik'.\n I ck,. Mt ^tl i.. ul 1 : T. To CeJlCTIVlS STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES .re GOt ot LJ3_lGaiL3 to insercice tea.hers - kceiviec eentr.ll office Sl.llt Ir.Strc-ice six.ial te. on spe-ciai education ricultrr, and recarr e: teaching ials, etc. tcoi-r.irros .r.u zTs cur-ivJ r.c-presentotives tro.n thrcu (3j districts r.rt at specified tkr.cs to deter-c. ine needs ar.d select ccr. sultcnts tc Vi lop ii. .irii .ciiL to ovu-.k.^t a iicCkls assess-c\n Select a te.-icher coc- ..rittec i-.gIc\n! carious i:isi_-r prCijra-r. nerds process\nissa i.e. due of riricri: cverrepruscatation\ngular schcol/prcgran rc-ir. oditicalicns\nscreeair..'. 33 m us  (Ti -J I 00 to -tj Ct (.Jt-caiiGii. BEGItl.'lltiG DATE 9/o9 o/c9 i/'H ? r I I,. Pre pLcij] i/iu\niv t: COKPLETlOH DATE OTSPirg COSTS Consul torus Substitutes Teachers Ilitiri-J i Supplies Printing Stipei Js RESPOHSiaiLITV EVALG'ATICU Director and Associate Directors /WE l.ill h,jve a coeprehensive tri-district staff developceat prograns M hfl I O o (O at p ..'H Ri cpi.i.c 11.ie iijf,,\n. '   . 1^-----lloa . . -1-- rgiiiiy i i'\"' and r C3JtCTIVS I i- , i-Jh .idthi.. X14\nlearning Center. ii-nL-iLi'-:: t i t .j ...___L., L.\ni Rri.r IN c.eti.il idiicatiun thruu.ch .'i eu..-.\n.ri h-i...ive staff de-veloie.ent ' C.u\n'j ituli: r- STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGINNING DATE COMPLETION DATE COSTS RESPONSIBILITT evaluation 1. i-ravide insei-vice that locuses on teacher Lehavioi lo'.iard a disprojxirtion ol rir.arity students eareJaUy 1-iack .Tales in special education. I i I XI m I I I (Ti -a 03 I 4^ Ui n) I o o to a. Develop training center for regular teachers experiencing problems in understariding ar.d teaci\n- ing black tnales ai.d other mincrity students Identify teachers i.ith high referral rates of black icales to special education chcdule inscrrice Arrange sucatitutes far regular teachers Seivice Ut.iL Khuvier .'..aili\nicati,\nfar teacher lehavicr . 1\\ . l.k 1 tec.hers to Ir, Cl I I .li .1 iiti lizc 1939-9U OgpiiTg \u0026gt;125,OOu-Per-sonricl \u0026gt; 20,000 iL-it-srials/ Se(plins Director - Special Educ. Supervisors/Coordir.ators of Special Education Improve instruction for raitri'/./ other students Decrease in referrals to Ljec-cJ Education Principals Supervisors - Spec. Exluc SOS Director - Spec. Educ. Learning Center Staff Rates of disi.iissal of i.i\n.ck males/other students increas .iSe in discipline reicrraii 111. . I!., e.i'. .r.lii. ui.-.\nrt . lcs, 1, Ali.,1 Ilf t  i...\ntill,.I /A -  Ml I 1 : : ... 1  -  .111 Pv.l...1.Sibil- G. .I\n1 . I I h i: J  L.C -_l-_Lciii .llLtlll:. I r /Ar- . ! t  L !c!' C3 T1V t S STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES EEG I till I NG DATE CCHPLETIOti DATE CCST5 RESPOHSIBILITY E7ALUATIC!I  i'revide ir.teas ii.t disciplinary interter.ti for\nStu. and ral:. adv. :its uh. .ll atctici*!! iereivicc it diffi-ult to\nce acad-tically\nSlaients ..ho the.. sic..- patterns of devel_.pr.ent i.iiich ra'. i' odi: test sccrt.3. co m . f'ipl) shills at Ceiil^.. v\u0026gt;lth Student . ?.u:u~. to school . Ilcnitor teacher effectiveness Aly [ re-referral interver.- tioi'.s traii.ir.. CdrciCjlUTa luiuj assess lint: Linkir.^ Asiessr.-c\nt\nClassroom Strategics . Identify regular u.c ers for training ide training ti...L tocuses on cliangvs tn instruclio\n.al tech:i-to iT.atch stud. h r.cc'S i! . i t .iluatv i.\n.'.\nckiteri.il instrixtions are ] re- :-nted to stcdints 5/=5 5/6 0 7/69 / o9 ' 9/cy Regular Teachers Regular Ttacl^rs upervisors/Princi(\u0026gt;als Regular Teachers Principals Expande-d ts'.d ic.pruve-d teachi\n.., skills Reduce referrals for u.ir.crit\n, students to special ed..cation (hoping filgf/ing Qlgping I (Tt QO I Ui I o I 00 en O lO 00 25 teachers 5 days X ' ,0C-0 J 500 Central Office Staff Psychological Lxeeair- rs i 1^1. I I\ni':! :: I '.on Gc4 1\nRcip'.r.s ible 1  Ccr.ti: .i -l ?,i\nl\u0026gt; r i ?lir, ILitllus 1.\n1I .11 I'rh'jr / ,'-rL--: - jk 1. . . 1\n. : i I C3JECTIVES STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGIll.'llhG DATE completion DATE COSTS RESPONSIBILITY EVALUATlC.'i 33 m o (Ti  to 'J I 00 CTi W tJ I o O to (O . O.eck for niss/tnleii\nef student skills/ deficits/teacliirg approaches . .Assess i.hy students are not nustering .materials Monitor stuleiit act iv'itics ever lor.,h ir. tur\\21s to identify Lfeskdj-Tij in ths learning process . kmiLcr icctive-r.ess - da stu dents understand tne t.isk? . Provide n-.A-rous i... hods of assessing chat students have learned . i^ale cut e.xclusicnj\nfeeturs for studenti not learning L.ck of instru.tic Inck of prerequisi les for ae-jiisilj i. for a'., .-ialls OlfPiTTg QTfpirig OTgpirig (\u0026gt;T8Ping ftlfipiJTg Ltattriuls jSuo L'l.pfove student pcrfor::.:nct\nI (D I 'I *iL.i I iKi t : r.  '.iin bu.il\nU :r I It. le I,,,-. I .J. - 1 1, i|, . J^_!\n?nljn!a^ibtr_l_________ ___________ I 1.,. . kre-j *' i\\rk: f .1, b j i.U bJif C3jtCTIVES STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEG I MU NG DATE CCHPLETION DATE COSTS RESPONSIBILITY evaluation i revise inservice ttut i'\u0026gt;\nuses on teacher liehavior toward a disproportion cf .-inority students c^xcxtU'. black males in special cvacation. rn co Ui fl I o caci.il factors - Scho-'.ls atteul, ! Atteridance Support syster. Pre-school instra-ction lrovi\u0026lt;,i2 TE.\\ InsctT. ice . Revici.- literature research regarding teacher expectation.\nfor minority students especially black ralts . l-ruvide training Application of trai.-,- ing by teacb.erj . ebserve/provide fee.i-back to teachers . Monitor teacherbthu\\ icr on an ongoing lasts 10/69 Qvpirig J5,^uu Special Education Qaitral Office Staff Increase stuJent/teacher interactions Higher exjx.ctations ter stirrr.ts Improved instruction and surij.t achieveraent O o r (,n Pcsi i:l. i f G.\nil : I D I c i I -Ut - P l. Tit Kiiitii  1. C. t U\nt:-S r 1 CSJtCTIVES STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGIHHIHG DATE I I 33 m o co co iMi I . : I 1 I . . .  . Pr.cy-\nCCMPLETIGN DATE COSTS RESPOHSIBILITY  Cufi i .111*. ' 1 LI - * 2 L ' I**- ' * E7ALUAT1CH Ijisure the fcllo'..-i:.c\nAssist Hack .Tales in developing adaptive sla.ll. a. I'rovide cur.prehensive assusai.ciits and dk^ju i. b. Provide short-ten?, interven,tions such co group activities to strengthen social itCer-action skills without changii.g student's assigrr-.ents c. L-plu....nt Exit.-.del F'lacec'.ent services in n diagnostic classrooff,. Placement to lie revit.,- td each StiT.ester. d. icvelcp Parent Ga.iuu.t (1) InfomuLiei/r.t^/u:i (?) Behavior Managen.-cni Skills (3) .'J-.ocacy icr Qiildren y iraii'.ir.^ (A\nIntA^mcticn L'.-.tcr Cei'.tit\nat.j corai\non?-a?.ily rot.ources 9/i9 9/89 9/89 C^icig Chping Qlgpirg W 0 I o o 1 Regular Teachers Psychological Lxaniiners Social Uorker Psychologist Improve siuJent acadc.ic [ erConn..nce Increase in siudenl alt-c.-.da Increase parent invol .c- ,criL a.-id advocacy SyslCfir.ide effective KiryJs-o.. inservice I . - . i f i ,11. '.on P 'Sa Gu i : _L I blf 1 -J. .l.Jh (df i Iltlll.. 1I 1| *4' Xr. I b t\n$ Z Prt/jr \u0026lt; 'iff ivuht / ''ri\nJ  J' ..J\nr blC- _li 5. C:JCTIVlS STRATEGIES/ activities BEG I till I IlG DATE CCHPLETIOtl DATE COSTS RESPOHSIBILITY EVALUATICII Ejisure increased equity in instructional r.ethod- h'.y thrauch a cecipreh, sl\\'e P^ogr. lai f di iviieent 5. Lnsure increased equity ii instructicnai methodology through participation in regular classes co m I I o 05 'XJ I o no I co to O to f. Miint.iin transitional Services to regular classes throujji liais.n support sendees g. Oevelop/adept rateriuld ard disscninale to lce.J schools Conduct the fullccing services\nin- a. b. d. b. 1/90 4/90 CtTgping learning Strategic\n. laut-ich Readin' 'o A Peer Tutoring Mike adaptations/i...'ii- fications of curri- culun for regular classes Identity effective in- structional tcchni ,ee\n\u0026gt; learning styles, chinq stylca tea (\u0026gt;epir|g 1990-92 $ 750 i 500 'Ot 100 S 2ou f\u0026gt;.Ci00 $ 3oJ Central Office Staff Social Corker Special Teachers Director and Special Education Supervisors Decreasing reterrals of blacr tales and other minority . dents to special education StL' hicrease-d application of skills in regular classes ft Increast-d student-teaclier interactions Reduce the niiiiber of students pulled out of regular classesXI m D. 1 Doj 1 : n Pes ..i.s.ul   fi:-.-t Lil' - L-r iLi_r OBJECTIVES 1. hcfine the ruiiito\nO I 1 uo eo I O i\n11 arg ti- - f IJXl vvaluation process in the District. J. To c: in data colltc-tien for a Icngitudinal stui/ of plccer.cnt frac tices in the District. tZ) 'd I o I ttiiis itf.riii: svst - STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES 1. ILnitoring is completed on a bi-nnLhly basis. A su.-riary report is pre vided to the building principals, action forms Corrective are pro-vided to ensure continued con.jiliance of due process ty the District. ) Ca..\npile sfx.cial education enrollment including race, sex, etc. a.-.c monitor cn a regular Ixisis. Data is re-viewed Dy the associate superii.Lcndent. Specific schools are targeted if proble.TS are identified by staff. Building principals an: their staff nust develop action plans to ra-mediate deficiencies identified ty Central Office. Ttieso pains are rionitored ly Centi-.i Office staff. 11  I:  -l.ii.i fir eonduclin.\n.1 lon\u0026lt;i Iucjj-l\n! l-IuI. i,f -|cLial hliicaticn [.rocr jj. BEGINNING DATE Oigoing Ongoing / rv ! wD.\n.-dc-.sLil ifii .1 COMPLETION DATE Ongoing Ongoing COSTS Softuaru S3,OOtJ Consultants n.ooo Forms S2,000 Professional Growth JI,COO Materi.ils $3,000 RESPOHSIBILITY evaluation Central Office Sfecial Education Staff Director - Special Education lleview as an on-going process all rules, regulations, policies, and practices in the District's special education and regular education progrxis. Prereferral interventions are utilized by school personnel. Each school has organized pupil service Loaias. Prertferral interventions are designed to prevent inappropriate referrals as well as focus on alternative instructional programs. school's pupil service team Each actively participates in ensuring appropriate referrals. O w I !\niirib-:\nf::\ni. G. . i : 1 P .:.,lGlt L, il. .id _t. G.,tt H i.il i-\n!!.- * k i L11 i i \u0026gt;\nt ir . 1 V ,1. 1: t I nt.iLiiiii ot ninjril',' stui.i.t. .\n.rol I'd in rro^i I,.. I k r L 111... I C3JECTIVE3 STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEG 1 Ilin NG DATE COHPLETIOH DATE COSTS RESPONSIBILIT* evaluation 1. Provide assistar.ce in reducing the cverrepresunta-tic. n of minority students in special education. 33 m I o to I  W TJ I O o its 1. Schedule staff development on the following: a. b. d. f. e- Current legislatio.n aid litigation Eligibility criteri. for special edurnin and related service: Current trends in assess.T.ent lion-biased asjussTtr.t Translation of test data into appro-priate curriculu.i and instruction Adaptive Behavior AsSC:S.T.Ci, L Curriculum Based ASSC: cent il. Apply appropriate pre-referral interventions .11. Review coc:ponents ci Little Rock School District delivery system a. i.-.licies ard Procedures Apprniral GaiL b. Organizational structure c. Curriculum d. Service delivery rui., I Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Oigoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Oigoing 1991 1991 1991 Ongoing $25,CeO overall cost: Inservice average cost per type- $3,000 X 7 sessions 75 teachers $2,000 printed matters\n$2,000 consul taj'.ts $3,003 Director of Special Education Supervisors Dr. Al Sullivan State Department of Education - Special Education Consultants Central Office Staff In.prove skills .in utilizing cne referral, placcsrent procedures Decrease in referral of minority students to special education Decrease in misclassification of minority students as handicap\ned Increased knowledge of due process and appropriate proerarrdng increased laiuwledge of e\nM..ciel Education Programs aid Procedures I 1 1'1.Ill 1O' 1'1 I '..UR Kc-.ipur.'., iblc M 11 L.'V CojI : le ci\"i: i I'liliurt lor t OBJECTIVES 1. i'artieijjate in a tri-districl assess.Tnint cu-- ir.ittee with a planned agenda and stated di:Ti-rim m \u0026lt;n lo I ro U) 'fl I o O o\u0026gt;\nk\nI i ?i ni 11.: _____ (O.ir/  1 r 1 -I  1 s t r i c t s j'.c Iri-district asses .IRI H.I..ltli\n|C'.r..l./ I.11 Uii fl^illi. . J $|vCl\u0026lt;ll 1/11. .111 .-.-I ..t I. .. STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGIHHIHG DATE COHPLETIOH DATE COSTS RESPOHSIBILITY EVALUATIOII . Dettnaine agenda nrttiig . Establish consiste.icy in areas of assessment: -screenirig -evaluation instnrr.er.ts -eligibility criteria -review existing assess- T.er.t instruments -identify new assessmei instrimeiits and pur-ciiase for field test-ii's It -expanj purchasing based on data secured from field testing Ongoing Ongoing $10,000 Directors - Special Elc. Ongoing Ongoing Consultants Examiners Consistency within and across tri-district boundaries thcuiji-out the assessment process. Ongoing Ongoing Qigoing C\u0026gt;going Ibterials/ Supplies Printing Cooperative Purchasing Coordinators 1 I \u0026gt; I JI. Ihi\n1 i \"..uil r'espur.. Itilc 1'1 Gc J1 I je t . .1 e r 3 (/ II, 1 Il.I Prey . \"Z Ari\nt'lCl'jJci-iiilll..ii - , ...t I \u0026gt;11 Alai blue :t lu.i C2JcCT[VES STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES SEGUIN ING DATE COMPLETION DATE COSTS RESPOHSIBILITY E'ZALG'ATICII e. Parent involvc.'xnt f. Parent Lducation Seminar - Special Education To reduce by ten percent over a five year period the number of minority students enrolled in siecific learning disabled pnulaticn Current Percent\n:' .Researeh-longitudinal Stud, a. Pilot Program in targeted schools utilizing various strategiu. b. Use effective strategies district wide 1993-94 Director of Spe\u0026lt;ial Education Supervisors Longitudinal studies vill iidi-cate tltat special education enrollment will reflect district's racial population. Principals black 7o4 Unite 30.^ Special Education Taxlias 3. Io reduce over a five year period by twenty percent the nusber of students cn-rolled in it. :ally retard-vd and speech i\npaired population. a. Lise as its base of operation federal, PL 94-142 and Statu Zirkansas\n\\ct 102, legislations. CL.nr 9/87 1993-94 Division of School Personnel Supervisors Adherence uh 11 reduce the [rrcjit of misclassification representation. id over-m well written ulicies lave been esl.'JJi.-hxi to provide satisf.x-tory assurance tltat policies, procedures and progrrrr.s esLddi.^bf c-d and addnistered l^- the district sh-ill L ccTELSUit \\,itli the ptt/- visiais of fcda-al\nnJ stale laiditcs. o I --J -XI co \u0026lt;n GO I W I o O 01 J t. .1. !1 TIMul. urJ 1 : S H 1 R.-'. 1 -r - i-st. lll .'Lattlli.s 1: r r(,'ir-.-lnrta -f. - :[Z\nIXLciiil Ijdu: I CoJtCTl 5 STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGINNING CATE COMPLETION DATE COSTS RESPONSIBILITT evaluation 70 m o -w lO I W tl I O I I I b. Review the referral evaluation, and placement decisions irade by the Education Mana^ecent Tca.m. c. Monitor the process aixj all due process folders in each school. 9/84 9/84 Ongoing Ongoing Special Education Gffitra Placenent decisions and Office Staff ecuca-tional plans will be bascsC on overall comprehensive mants. assess- An appreciable decline in corrective action procedures. o  iMI Ub'.iiOII liKil I. -.j.i I. 1.1 . 11 If r 1,11 CEJECTI'.'ES I iiijj\n'!! Lie. .iiiiiii. i'. .iiU',I ir. b 1Vr. UJI tjirru ulu Pre jrjin/Are : I .  Irj-J '! J'lu. I . STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGINNING DATE COMPLETION DATE COSTS RESPONSIBILITY evaluation 1. Insure pro.'xjrtion.ite representation of kill r,u.ilified minority special education teachers. 33 m I ' 00 uo I cn W hd I o O 03 Recruit and employ minor-ity teachers in areas of: Curtilic-a. Mildly haixlicapped b. Hearing impaired c. Modcrately/scverel handicapped d. Speech impairud e. Visually unpaired Expand staff development activities: a. Partnership kith state collejjes and universities for training aid retraining of teachers. b. See Student Idc-nti  fication and Place (cent and Instructional Methodology for otlier staff develoiinent activi  ties. 7/89 8/89 1993-94 Oigoing $7,000 $4,000 ibition Directors: Personnel Special Education Supervisors- Special Education Professors, Special Education Deparbnent Central Office Staff 50 percent of district's teaching staff kill be qualified minority teachers r 1 Jfl\n:i\n-i i :ii\n',li IlMil J-.\"\n LCr. Scspors lb 1 GgjI\n'111 l-nSL!!' J__ i 1 ij.L lur Isl. 11 1 :r.-'VC il l2U^ i IL I  I .\"klLlhl\n. ind equity in raiti i i.ils end supplies provided to harelicapiinl students.  CurriulilLI\nrc'jruih/z.rtj 1 1. OBJECTIVES STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGItilllNG DATE COHPLETIOH DATE COSTS RESPONSIBILITY EVALUATION Social education teachars t.'ill detnonstrate systcn-atically that hi^h quality effective special instruc lien is being provided through the use of varied innovative, and appropriate iraterials and supplies. a . Identify a special education conmitte-a representative of the total special educatiui staff to assist in thu: selection of appropriate materials and supplies 3/\u0026amp;1 (\u0026gt;igoing None Director - Special Educ Each classroom will contain adequate and appropriate raterialt/ supplies b. Schedule \"tkiterial Fair\" Ongoing for staff using local, state, and nationally knoi.Ti vendors c. Identify materials/ supplies, etc. that an basic to resource, itinerant and special classrooms 3/88 ftigoing $120,000 Supervisors Special Education Ccomittee Lnprove quality of instruction d. Identify rciterials/ supplies needed to ira-prove/ enhance the quality of instruction identified in students lEP's 10/89 Oigoing Special Education Connittee e. .'ionitor selcction/usv of liciterials/supplies Ongoing Ongoing Principals Supervisors At I uJ i i' 1 jn H-SOr Bvsp.r.ilUe iii'n.ta:- - Fs 11 1 I  r l/, e uCc I\n5' . C* rntir.iiH .irj- r 5 C3JECTIVES STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES 8EG1IIH1HG DATE IIMLl !l.i -  --''cAnn CCuurrii''iiccuulliittnn - Special 1ro.ra r r .-^rM/Tjiecial Lducatich' XI m o I  00 (E \u0026lt;O I 'a in t) I o COMPLETION DATE COSTS RESPOHSIBILITY EVALUATICH f. Activities to focus on current trends of nee- materials/smiie g. Schedule sharing times for effective and innovative use of materials/ s-pplics h. Aaaptations/rxxlifi-cations of materials, suppl ies/equipnei'.t Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing $3,000 $2,000 Supervisors Director Teachers Teachers Informed regarding national trends Availability of new materials and supplies I i I o FOR TRANSITIONAL PURPOSES WE HAVE INCLUDED DATE ADJUSTMENTS TO ALLOW FOR TIMELY IMPLEMENTATION VOCATIONAL EDUCATION c SP-01111 Annual Plan 1994 (^ear) Scr Person Responsl^V vocational Directors Goal: To 'mprove articulation/offerings of PCSSD, LRSD, and NLRSD  lit ) Cl1i icn InslriKt ion Prc'\nrani/Arei Voca t i OBJECTIVES STRATEGIES/ ACTIVITIES BEGItllii.'iG DATE CCMPtETlCN CATE COSTS RESPCHSIBlLliy EVALL'ATiCfl To improve articulation of 1 vocational programs. I Attend each other's 'advisory council meetings 1903 1989 Ongoing Each Vocational Director Actual attendance Improve recruitment of students into Metropolitan Vo-Tech 2. Review course offerings 1988 - 1989 Annually FI AvQtnA None Vocational Di rec tots 1 -a a* Id n\u0026gt; :ia m o lO 00 2. Offer Open Houses Student Brochures Employment fair 1988 1989 Annually -$989 Completion Activity of $200 Vocational Directors 1989 - 1990 1990 II .. Annually. -1998 Completion Activity of $2S0 Vocational Directors Annually -1998- I I $250 Vocational Directors I I Completion Activity Completion Activity of of Ui hO I O hO AREA |j\ni) IJI.S1 iki riAH iiii-iuu I TinhJ.iin\nVotiLiandL-- Goal: Io improve cooperation among vocational departments in PLSSD. LRSD^ ahd HLRSD oitittriivLs 3. Student meetings 3.1 4. Share Information 4^ 4.2 Sl'KATOI I I'.S/AC.r IV1 f I E.S Conduct monthly meetings among vocational directors It Share applicant pool 5. Comnon Course Description 5.1 2t Consult each other concerning new course offerings Review course offerings and course descriptons for differences a 01 Id n\u0026gt; o m AO Ui t) I o BEflllltllflG DAl-E Monthly September -12 Oeteber-ll Hevember-IS Beeember-11 uiDiix\nDAIK Q-Ospj.ns When new course i Ongoing arise January 1989 February 1989 Ongoing ItliltXISIltlLI'lY Each director will attend Each student wi11 attend Each Director will attend EVAIJIAIKX) Minutes of Meetimjs Ddcumentation Documentation Documentation W GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING PROGRAM COOPERATIVE EFFORTS INVOLVING THE DISTRICTS IN PULASKI COUNTY In order that minority students are better served by school counselors, the directors or coordinators of counseling services for the districts, including the NLRSD, should meet on a monthly basis to share concerns, and plans for Joint activities. Some of the areas of cooperation that will be explored are: entering the working world students 1. employment for directly after high school. 2. 3. minority scholarships and financial aid, parent education In terms of student opportunities. 4 . college recruitment minority applicants. practices and their impact on 5. recruitment procedures for AP classes, advanced classes, magnet schools and specialty programs, and 6. effective Intervention and/or at-risk students. strategies for disadvantaged The outcomes expected from using a Joint approach by all con- cerned school counseling personnel in the multl-dlstricts Include: Increased employment for post high youth. school minority 1. 2. more minority students attending receiving financial assistance to attend college college. and/or 3. increased enrollment of minority students in advanced and AP classes. 4. 5. earlier targeting of at-risk and disadvantaged students resulting in a decrease in the drop-out rate, and more positive parental interaction with the schools. SP-01114 83 01800To facilitate and Insure the identification of all students requiring academic remediation, a joint testing program based on the MAT-6 will be considered. The directors of testing for the districts, will explore a joint test purchasing, scoring, and reporting procedure. Such a program may reduce cost and provide uniformity in test data. A bl-raclal multi-district monitoring team composed of parents, teachers, administrators and other concerned citizens of the community will bo formed to monitor test preparation and testing conditions. Teachers of all the districts will be instructed in methods of identifying both at-risk students and gifted and talented students, with standardized test data as a key identification cir- terlon. Teachers will also be shown how to use individual student reports to pin-point a student's areas of significant weakness, and how to provide appropriate interventions. Finally, a system should be devised which insures that the records of students transferring among the districts, including the NLRSD, are sent and received in a timely manner. A uniform records transfer system (including the NLRSD) would decrease the number of incidents in which students are incorrectly placed because of insufficient student data. Joint cooperation in the areas of counseling and testing should result in additional education and career advantages for minority students. The responsibility for the foregoing cooperative efforts rests with the Coordinator of Counseling Services. 84 SP-01115PARENT INVOLVEMENT/COMMUNITY LINKAGES Citizens in our democracy have a fundamental right to be infoirmed about those things in their communities that affect their lives which, to be sure, include the business and operation of their schools. Typically, school districts do not adequately address parents' concerns nor do they involve community groups substantively in the planning process. The literature suggests that community Involvement is of utmost importance in planning and implementing a school desegre- gation plan. Community involvement and citizen participation result in greater community commitment to social change and help to build broad-based community support for school desegregation. Effective parental Involvement affords parents the sense that they have some control over their children's education and their future. Research Indicates that parental involvement in schools as well as in classroom activities do affect student achievement positively. In addition, the System Development Cooperation (1981) found evidence that parental involvement in school activities can improve interracial attitudes among all students. There are variety of approaches and specific activities that can be effective in promoting support and Involvement in desegregated schools. The districts' goal is to achieve a cooperative working relationship between and among the school districts by strengthening existing community involvement organizations and programs. as SP-01116 85 a 01802well as developing new additional programs designed to facilitate substantive involvement and cooperation of parents/citizens in the districts. The proposed plan, which will be implemented in the fall of 1969 and be an ongoing process, will include: A. Develop parent involvement/support activities which facilitate the teaching-learning process: 1. Establish Parents in Learning Program, a a community-supported effort to involve parents in 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. the learning process programs as APPLE, which would utilize such Just Say No,\" and HIPPY\nProvide workshops for parents on such topics as discipline, learning aids, study skills, academic tutoring, etc.\nParents and staff work cooperatively to develop strategies to encourage positive home learning\nEach school will establish a teacher/parent commit- tee to design and implement school-based activities\nPromote multi-ethnic In-school paront/teacher committees\nDevelop and expand the parent volunteer programs: a. Encourage all parents to become an active member of a parent involvement program\nb. Recruit prospective committee members from diversified communities including retired n teachers and community leaders\nSP-01117 86 01803B. utilize parents in marketing educational programs and benefits that will result from desegregation: 1. Develop a resource list of parents who are willing to be contacted to talk with potential patrons\n2. Establish parent recruitment teams in each school to encourage families to enroll in the public 3. C. schools: Seek positive media coverage featuring parents from all multiethnic backgrounds: a. b. c. Work through local parent/teacher organlza- tlons to encourage positive media coverage\nDesignate a contact person at each local school to report to an established information center\nProduce video presentations of area schools for use by real estate offices, utility companies and day care centers\nEncourage community-wide multi-ethnic cltlzen/parent/ teacher/student committees for input Into planning and decision-making: 1. Establish building. district and multi-district level committees which are racially, geographically and soclo-economlcally representative to provide input and feedback on the operations of the schools and the districts\nSP-01118 87 01804D. Work with the Chamber of Commerce Committee on Education on Its advocacy for public school activities: 1. Expand the school/business partnerships\n2. Have a multi-district event to honor business part- ners in public schools\n3. Encourage the Chamber to continue existing programs such as ths teacher appreciation rally and the Excellence in Education Awards for educators and students. Special needs will be addressed in each school district's desegregation plan Participation and programs are contingent on additional staffing and funds in PCSSD SP-01119 88 0180Sdocket \\O. 126 3a return to folder 29a.1 V s \u0026lt;v PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DESEGREGATION CASE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT March, 1989 (As Revised September 28, 1989) SP-01120 03443 PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DESEGREGATION CASE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT March, 1989 (As Revised September 28, 1989) SP-01121 03444 PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DESEGREGATION CASE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT CONTENTS Page I. Introduction 1 II. General Provisions 2 III. A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Magnet Funding Calculation .............. Magnet Surplus Credit..................... Magnet Operational Charge................. Restrictions on Funding Magnet Schools .  Continuation of Existing Funding ........ Compensatory Education, Early Childhood Education and other Statewide Programs . . Conditions to Settlement ................. Act 34 Exemption ......................... Staff Development......................... Recognition of Autonomy................... District Budgets ......................... Prohibition of Punitive Action .......... Rededicated Millages ..................... Limit of Liability ....................... Majority to Minority Provisions.......... Consent Order............................. State's Role in the Desegregation Process . . A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. . L. M. Monitoring Compensatory Education........ Statement of Support for the Plans .... Petition for Election..................... Statutes and Regulations Affecting Desegregation............................. Elimination of the Pulaski County Education Service Cooperative....................... Commitment to Prlncit)les................. Remediation of Disparities in Academic Achievement............................... Test Validation........................... In-Service Training....................... Recruitment of Minority Teachers ........ Financial Assistance to Minority Teacher Candidates ............................... Minority Recruitment for ADE Staff .... School Construction....................... 11 SP-01122 03445 2 2 3 4 4 6 6 7 8 9 10 10 10 11 11 12 13 13 13 14 14 14 15 15 16 16 16 17 17 18 IV. Dismissal of Litigation 18 A. B. C. Dismissal of the State with Prejudice and Release................................... Agreement Regarding Litigation Among Joshua and the Districts......................... Reserved Issue ........................... 18 19 19 V. Attorneys* Fees 20 VI. The LRSD Settlement 22 VII. A. B. Payment Schedule and Terms Loan Provisions.......... 22 24 The PCSSD Settlement 27 A. B. C. D. Financial Settlement 1. Magnet Payments . 2. Other Payments. . Staff Development. . Food Services. . . . Housing............ 27 28 28 29 30 30 VIII. The NLRSD Settlement 30 A. B. C. D. Magnet Payments. . ................... Compensatory Education Payments. . . . Additional Payments................... Description of Additional Compensatory Education Programs ................... 30 31 31 36 IX. Execution 36 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A Attachment B Attachment C Attachment D Release of Claims State Release of Claims - LRSD Release of Claims' - PCSSD Release of Claims NLRSD 111 SP-01123 03446 I. Introduction The Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") Desegregation Plan (January 31, 1989) , the Pulaski County Special School District No. 1 (\"PCSSD\") Peirmanent Desegregation Plan (October 3, 1988 , as supplemented February 15, 1989), the North Little Rock School District (\"NLRSD\") Desegregation Plan of March and October, 1986 (as amended or modified through February 15, 1989 or by operation o this settlement agreement) and the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan (February 15, 1989) (the \"Plans\") hold excellent promise for achieving unitary school systems in these three districts which are free from the vestiges of racial discrimination. Continued litigation regarding funding and other issues may make more difficult and further delay effective implementation of the constitutional obligations of the State of Arkansas and the three Pulaski County school districts (the \"Districts\"). This settlement of the issues concerning the Districts, the Joshua Intervenors (\"Joshua\"), the Knight Intervenors (\"Knight\") and the State of Arkansas in Little Rock School District vs. Pulaski County Special School District, et al, No. LR-C-82-866 and cases consolidated therein and their predecessors (\"this Litigation\") is in the best interest of the students, patrons and staffs of the Districts and the people of the State. SP-01124 1 03447 The superintendents of the Districts support the settlement and it has received the unanimous approval of their respective boards of directors. The business community as represented by the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce also supports the settlement and the Plans. That group has pledged the strong support of its membership to help the Districts achieve many of the goals of the Plans. The black plaintiff intervenors (\"Joshua\"), the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., the Little Rock and North Little Rock chapters of the NAACP and the Greater Little Rock Christian Ministerial Alliance pledge their support to the Plans and this settlement. The settlement is also supported by Knight (LRCTA, PACT, NLRCTA and the AEA) . The Arkansas State Board of Education, the Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\") and the Governor of Arkansas support the settlement. I SP-01125 1-A 0344811. General Provisions A. Magnet Funding Calculation Each District's magnet students will be included in the calculation of that District's table rate in determining State aid to be paid under the MFPA formula or any future funding formula. B. Magnet Surplus Credit Any cash surplus remaining in the magnet school fund for given fiscal year after all expenses and receivables for that fiscal year have been accounted for (including payment to the host District for administrative costs) will be returned to the Districts and ADE as follows: (1) NLRSD will receive the difference a a between its table rate and $1,550 multiplied by its average daily membership in the magnet schools for the fiscal year to the extent surplus funds are available\n(2) If additional surplus funds exist following the payment to NLRSD, PCSSD will receive the difference between its table rate and $1,550 multiplied by its average daily membership in the magnet schools for the fiscal year, to the extent surplus funds are available\n(3) If additional surplus funds exist following the payments to NLRSD and PCSSD, 2 SP-01126 03449 LRSD will receive the difference between its table rate and $1,550 multiplied by its average daily membership in the magnet schools for the fiscal year, to the extent surplus funds are available. (4) If additional surplus funds remain following the payments to NLRSD, PCSSD and LRSD, the ADE will be refunded its magnet operation payments to the extent such funds are available. This provision will remain in effect for seven years beginning with the 1988-89 school year. The payment to the host District for administration of the magnet schools for the 1988-89 school year will be 3.09% of the magnet school fund. In future years. the payment to the host District for the administration of magnet schools will be the same percentage of the magnet fund as the state-determined percentage of the host District's budget attributable to administrative costs. C. Magnet Operational Charge The current per pupil operational charge for magnet students ($3,100) will remain in force until changed by the Magnet Review Committee, or in the event the Magnet Review Committee is restructured or eliminated, then by agreement of the parties, subject to the review of the district court in any event. SP-01127 3 03450 The parties will review the operational charge on an annual basis but will not increase the charge solely for the purpose of creating a surplus. Calculations in paragraphs II.B., VII.A.1. and VIII.A assume a $3,100 operational charge. D. Restrictions on Funding Magnet Schools The State will have no further obligation to contribute any additional funds to magnet schools other than under paragraph II E. below. The Districts' obligation to contribute funds to magnet schools shall be limited to their paying their portion of the costs of the six existing magnet schools pursuant to the Court's order of February 27, 1987. Any reference to the six existing magnet schools in this settlement shall mean, for funding purposes, up to their present seating capacities. Those seating capacities are as follows: Carver 613 E. Williams Gibbs Booker Mann Parkview 515 351 660 935 991 Continuation of Existing Funding In addition to any payment described elsewhere in this agreement, the State will continue to pay the following costs: SP-01128 4 03451 (1) The State's portion of magnet school operational costs for the six existing magnet schools (Gibbs, Booker, Carver, Parkview, Mann and Williams) using the formula employed by the State during the 1987-88 school year modified by the inclusion of the number of students from each District attending magnet schools in the calculation of that Districts table rate for distribution of MFPA\n(2) Majority to minority student transfer incentive payments to the host and home Districts as described in the August 26, 1986 M to M stipulation\n(3) The State's share of Magnet Review Committee expenses as currently allocated\n(4) Transportation to the six existing magnet schools\n(5) Transportation of majority to minority transfer students between the Districts as described in the August 26, 1986 (6) M to M stipulation\nand The State's share of any and all programs for which the Districts now re\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_979","title":"Discipline","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["North Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1989/1997"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School discipline","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Discipline"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/979"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\n PGMID : DIS012R DisciplinaryR eferral Su,maryB y Page AUG-F8E9B- 90 Referral Reason 3/08/91 -------TOTAL--------I-------BLACK--------1-------WHITE--------I-------OTHER--------I PARENTI PARENTI PARENTI PARENTI CODDEE SCRIPTION TOTALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTACT! 01 Disregard for directions of teachers 2762 31. 99X 1506 I 1868 21.MZ 971 887 10.m 528 7 .OBl 7 I or administrators, I 02 Disregard for directions of bus drivers, 508 5,887. 243 I 403 4.m 168 I 104 1.20% 74 .on lunch aides, or other authorized school I I personnel. I I I 03 Disruption and/or interference with the 2326 26.94% 1605 I 1580 18.30% 107b I 741 8.581 526 s .m 3 I nor  al and orderly conduct of school I I and school-sponsoreadc tivities. I I 04 Behavior that involves indecent and/or 101 i.m 77 I 70 .an 53 31 .m 24 0 .OOl 0 I iuoral acts. I OS Wagerinogr any formo f gambling. 7 .08:t 6 I 4 .m 3 3 .03l 3 0 .OOl 0 I 06 Physical abuse or assault or threatened 123 i.m 94 I 94 1.08% 72 29 .331 22 0 .001 0 I physical abuse to a school employee. 07 Physical abuse or assault or threatened 1401 16.m m1 994 11.sn 664 406 4. 70'/. 291 .Oll 0 I physical abuse to other student or any I other individual. I I 08 Possession of a knife, razor, ice pick, 56 .m 51 I 39 .m 36 16 .181 14 I .01'/. 1 I explosive, pistol, rifle, shotgun, I I pellet gun or any other object that can I be considereda weapono r dangerous instrument. I I 09 Using, offering for sale or selling 32 .m 28 I 10 .rn 8 I 22 .25'/. 20 0 .00'/. 0 I alcoholic beverages or any narcotic drug I as defined by Arkansas law or School I Board policy. I I 10 Destruction of or the atte1pt to destroy 51  597. 40 I 24 .m 17 I 27 .m 23 I 0 .001 0 I school property. I I I 11 Stealing or the atte,pt to steal school 75 .m 55 I 62 .717. 46 I 13 ,15'/. 9 I 0 ,OOl 0 I property or the property belonging to I I I another individual, I I I 12 Cheatingo r copyingt he worko f another 17 .m 11 I 10 .rn 7 I 7 .08'/. 4 0 .00'/. 0 I student. I I 13 Failure to abide by attendance rules, 694 8.03% 590 I 373 4 .32'l. 317 I 315 3.64'/. 267 I 6 .06X 6 14 Useo f profanity, vulgar languageo r 328 3,7 97. 223 I 222 2.m 143 I 105 l.21l 79 I ,01'/. 1 obscene language. I I 15 Com1ittinge xtortion, coercion, black- 4 .047. 3 I 4 .on 3 I 0 .00'/. 0 I 0 .OOl 0 I mail or forcing another person to act I I I I through the use of force or threat of I I force. I I 16 Engagingin verbal abuses such as naae- 104 1.201. 84 I 70 .Bl'/. 57 I 34 .m 27 I 0 .oox 0 I calling, ethnic or racial slurs, or I I I I using derogatory statements to other I I I I students, school personnel or other I I individuals. I I I 17 Hazing, Hazing includes any willful act 43 .m 30 I 31 .m 19 I 10 .m 9 I 2 .m 2 I done by a student, either individually I I or with others, to another student for the purpose of subjecting the other student to indignity, humiliation, etc. I TOTARLE FERRALS8-6--32 5601I 5858 67.86%3 660 1 mo 31,m 1920 24 .m 21 ~ .,. PGHID : DIS013R DisciplinaryR eferral Su11arBy y 3/08/91 AUG-F8E9B- 90 ActionT aken -------TOTAL--------I-------BLACK--------I-------WHITE--------1-------0THER--------I PARENTI PARENTI PARENTI PARENTI CODDEE SCRIPTION TOTALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAI CT 01 Conferencwe ith Student 1324 15.33'l. 490 I 938 10,861 316 I 382 4.m 171 I 4 ,04% 3 I I I 02 Conferencwe ithP arent 247 2,86'l. 1951 165 1.m 124 I 81 .m 70 I .on 1 I I I 03 Conferencwe ith Studenta nd Parent 341 3.m 316 I 203 2,351, 185 I 137 UBI 130 I .on I I I 04 Privileges Denied 227 2.62'/, 100 I 171 1.98X BO I 55 .m 19 I .on I I 05 BehaviorC ontract 145 1.67'l. 100 I 86 .99% 56 I 58 .m 44 I .on 0 I I I I I 06 DetentionH al1 3459 40.on 2276I 2233 25.86X 1440I 1219 14,m 830 I 7 .OBX 6 I I 07 StudentN ill NakeU pT i e 39 .45'1: 24 I 24 .m 15 I 15 .m 9 I 0 ,001 0 I I I I 08 Student Placed on Probation 240 2.787. m1 142 1.64% 83 I 96 i.m 67 I 2 .m 2 I I I I I 09 OnC ampuSsu spension( S.A.C.) 1226 14.20% 1010I 850 9.841 6751 370 4.281 329 I 6 .m 6 I I I 10 Off CampuSsu spension 160 1.85% 115 I 114 i.m 77 46 .m 38 I 0 .001 0 I I I 11 Boys Club Suspension 79 .m 62 I 56 .64Z 41 I 23 .m 21 I 0 ,001 0 I I I I 12 Bus Suspension m i.m: 91 I 99 1.141 75 I lb .181 16 I 0 .001 0 I I I I I 13 Corporal Punish1ent 560 6.487. 4251 433 5.0H 324 I 127 i.m 101 I 0 ,001 0 I I I I 14 RecoMmenEdxedp ulsion 34 .m 32 I 25 .m 23 I 8 .09l 8 I .on 1 I I I I I 15 Other 436 5,051. 213 I 319 3.691 146 I 117 i.m 67 I 0 .001 0 I I I I I TOTAALC TIONS---8--632 5601I 5858 67.86%3 660I 2750 31.BSl 1920I 24 .m 21 I \u0026lt; .. . ~ . Attachment II-I PGII D: D!S012R Disciplinary Referral Su11aryB y Page AUG-FE90B- 91 Referral Reason 3/08/91 -------TOTAL--------J-------BLACK--------I-------WHITE--------1-------0THER--------I PARENTI PARENTI PARENTI PARENT I CODDEE SCRIPTION TOTAL PCT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAI CT 01 Disregard for directions of teachers 2730 30.281 ml I 1900 21.081 13491 815 9.0H 581 IS .m 11 or ad1inistrators. 02 Disregard for directions of bus drivers, 388 4 .307. 272 276 3.061. 187 109 1.201. 82 3 .031 3 lunch aides, or other authorized school personnel. 03 Disruption and/or interference Nith the 2749 30.50% 2000 1928 2un 1404 814 9.031 593 7 .on 3 nor1al and orderly conduct of school and school-sponsoreda ctivities. I 04 Behavior lhal involves indecent and/or 56 .m 36 42 .m 26 13 ,141. 10 .on 0 I i111oraal cts. 05 Wagerinogr any for  of ga  bling. 8 .081. 7 5 .05'l. 5 I 3 .m 2 0 .001. 0 I 06 Physical abuse or assault or threatened 106 1.1TI. 93 I 70 .m 60 I 36 .m 33 I 0 .001 0 I physical abuse to a school e1ployee. I I 07 Physical abuse or assault or threatened 1537 17,0S'l. 1132 I 1111 12.:m 804 420 4.m 322 b .Obl 6 I physical abuse to other student or any I other individual. 08 Possession of a knife, razor, ice pick, 64 .m 60 34 .m 34 29 .m 25 I .on explosive, pistol, rifle, shotgun, pellet gun or any olher object that can be considered a weapono r dangerous instru111ent. 09 Using, offering for sale or selling 45 .m 43 23 .m 21 22 .241 22 0 .001. 0 alcoholic beverages or any narcotic drug as defined by Arkansas law or School Board policy. 10 Destruction of or the atte1pt to destroy 30 .m 26 13 .m 11 17 .!Bl 15 0 .OO'l. 0 school property. 11 Stealing or the atte1pt to steal school 74 .an 56 I 55 ,bl'l. 39 19 .m 17 I 0 .OO'l. 0 property or the property belonging to another individual. 12 Cheating or copying the work of another 20 .m 16 lb .m 14 4 .041. 2 0 .001 0 student. 13 Failure to abide by attendance rules. 640 7.101. 565 I 344 3.811. 300 I 295 3.m 264 I .Oil I I 14 Use of profanity, vulgar language or 365 4.041. 270 I 266 2.951. 192 I 97 1.07% 76 I 2 .021 2 I obscene language. 15 Co11itting extortion, coercion, black- 13 .14'I. 12 I 12 .rn 11 .on 0 .001 0 I ail or forcing another person to act I through the use of force or threat of force. 16 Engagingi n verbal abuses such as na,e- 133 1. 4 71. 104 93 l.OH 68 38 .m 34 2 .on 2 calling, ethnic or racial slurs, or using derogatory state1ents to other students, school personnel or other individuals, I 17 Hazing. Hazing includes any Nillful act 55 .m 45 I 44 . 48'l. :,7 11 .m 8 0 .OO'l. 0 I done by a student, either individually or with others, to another student for the purpose of subjecting the other student to indignity, huMiliation, etc. TOTARLE FERRALS9-0--13 6678 6232 69. 141 4562 2743 3o.m 2087 38 .m 29 I ...... . P6MID : DIS013R Disciplinary Referral Su,maryB y 3/08/91 4UG-FE9B0- 91 ActionT aken -------TOTAL--------I-------BLACK--------I-------WHITE--------1-------0THER--------I PARENTI PARENTI PAREIN T PARENTI CODDEE SCRIPTION TOTALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAIT COTT ALP CT CONTAI CT 01 Conferencew ith Student 11S8 12.84% 730 I 801 8.887. 491 I 349 3.87% 231 I 8 .087. 8 I I I I I n2 Conferencew ith Parent 331 3.67'/. 310 I 216 2.39% 203 I 113 i.m 105 I 2 .02! 2 I ! I I 03 Conferencew ith Student and Parent 391 4,337. 369 I 268 2.9n 251 122 i.m 117 I .OH I 04 Privileges Denied 382 4.237. 274 269 2.987. 192 I 111 1.237. 80 2 .02% 2 I I 05 BehaviorC ontract 132 1.467. 122 99 1.on 91 I 33 .m 31 0 ,007. I) I 06 DetentionH alI 3323 36.867. 2172 I 2235 24.m 1457 1075 11.92% 709 13 .147. 6 I I ,_17S tudent Will MakeU pT ime 78 .867. 59 I 54 .m 41 23 .257. 17 I .017. 1)8 Student Placed on Probation m 3.987. 295 I m 2.Bn 214 I 98 1.081. 79 2 .on 2 I\n)9 OnC ampuSsu spension( S.A.C.) 1355 15.03%1 181)I 898 9.967. 764 I 451 5.007. 411 6 .067. 5 I I l0 Off CampuSsu spension 241 2.6 7'l. 218 I 160 1.m 143 I 81 .an 75 0 ,007. 0 I ! 11 Boys Club Suspension 120 1.337. 110 I 81 .891/. 75 I 39 .rn 35 I 0 .007. 0 I I I I \\2 Bus Suspension 184 2,047. 153 I 153 1.m 130 I 31 .m 23 0 .00'.I. 0 I I [3 Corporal Punishment 246 2.m 205 I 201 2.m 165 I 45 .m 40 0 .oor. 0 ft\\\\\u0026gt;Y, .. - I 13 rt:{l) I 6 fl, I l 4 RecoamendEedx pulsion .lff 8 I ,..Cf. - ,{}'17: .-n ,.-1 .on 0 .007. 0 I I I 15 Other 703 7.797. 473 I 529 5.867. 338 I 171 1. 89'.I. 133 3 .03% 2 I I TOTAALC TIONS----9-013 6678 I 6232 69. 14'l. 4562 I 2743 30.43'l. 2087 I 38 .m 29 I THE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICE OF STUDENT AFFAIRS February 8, 1991 EXPULSIONS FOR 1990-91 SCHOOL YEAR NAME SCHOOL GRADE/RACE/SEX OFFENSE Waits, Sheere Lakewood Md. Richey, Haden Ridge road Md. Conklin, David Ridge road Md. Lowe, Dekashun Ridge road Md. Perkins, Willil-, Rose City Md. Bryant, Wilma Rose City Md. Campbell, Jeremiah Rose City Md. Barnett, Me1issa NLRHS-East Dotson, Andre NLRHS-East Kuske, Danny NLRIIS-East Watson, Pashee NLRHS-East Wesley, Roderick NLRHS-East Bogard, Dornetrical NLRHS-East Gunnells, Yosheki NLRJIS-East Horton, Eric NLRHS-East Key, Dewayne NLRHS-East Moore, Phillip NLRHS-East Rhodes, K,,y~hia NLRHS-East Talley, Anthony NLRHS-East BLK/WHT 1 1 DISTRICT POLICY PROHIBITED CONDUCT 8 /Black/Female Weapon 7 /White/Male Prohibited 8 /White/Male Weapon 8 /B\nt.ack/Female Weapon 7 /Black/Male Weapon 8 /Black/Female Weapon 8 /Black/Male Prohibited 9 /White/Female Weapon 9 /Black/Male Drugs and 9 /White/Male Weapon 9 /Black/Female Weapon 9 /Black/Male Disorderly 10 /Black/Male Disorderly 10 /Black/Female Weapon 10 /Black/Male Disorderly 10 /Black/Male Weapon 10 /White/Male Weapon 10 /Black/Female Weapon 10 /White/Male Weapon 3 0 1 0 FBJ FBM FBO FBP DEMONSTRATIONS AND DISORDERLY ACTIVITIES DRUGS AND ALCOHOL 8 5 WEAPONS AND DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTS 13 6 Total: 19 Conduct Conduct Alcohol Activit-, Activit.'., Activity .. NLRSD REF: DIS032 Suspension/Expulsion Comparisons Run Date: 7 /22/93 MIDDLE SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through JUNE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------== 1 9 9 1 - 9 2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----BM------ -----BF------ 1ota1 number of a.,oigm,ents: # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT /TOT Actual students involved: # STU # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU =======-=----=--------------------------------------------------------==-====-=- 09 S.A.C. 394 42.00% 232 24.73% 180 109 10 HOME SUSP. 22 50.00% 13 29.55% 20 10 11 BOYS CLUB 63 55.26% 28 24.56% 44 22 16 EXPULSION 3 100.00% 0 .00% 3 0 1 9 9 2 - 9 3 -----BM------ -----BF------ 1ota1 number of assigments: # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT /TOT Actual students involved: # STU # STU  236 25.16% 134 9 20.45% 8 17 14.91% 15 0 .00% 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT /TOT # STU 76 8.10% 46 0 .00% 0 6 5.26% 5 0 .00% 0 -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 938 469 44 38 114 86 3 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 612 45.30% 320 23.69% 193 113 10 HOME SUSP. 56 39.72% 46 32.62% 45 32 11 BOYS CLUB 88 59.06% 34 22.82% 53 25 16 EXPULSION 1 33.33% 2 66.67% 1 2 COMPARISION -----BM------ rotal number of assigrments: # REF PCT /TOT Actual students involved  # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 328 24.28% 111 31 21. 99% 25 22 14.77% 16 0 .00% 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 91 6.74% 39 8 5.67% 5 5 3.36% 4 0 .00% 0 -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 1351 456 141 107 149 98 3 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 218 55.33 % 88 37.93 % 92 38.98 % 15 19.74 % 413 13 4 23- 7- 13- 10 HOME SUSP. 34 154.55 % 33 253.85 % 22 244.44 % 8 800.00 % 97 25 22 17 5 69 11 BOYS CLUB 25 39.68 % 6 21.43 % 5 29.41 % 1- 16.67-% 35 9 3 1 1- 12 16 EXPULSION 2- 66.67-% 2 200.00 % 0 .00 % 0 .00 % 0 2- 2 0 0 0 Z-3 - REF: DIS032 Suspension/Expulsion Comparisons Run Date: 7 /22/93 HIGH SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through JUNE -=----------------------------------------------------------------=-----====-=== 1 9 9 1 - 9 2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------= -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- 1ota1 nunber of as~ignnents: # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT /TOT Actual students involved: # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------= 09 S.A.C. 313 53.97% 100 17.24% 143 24.66% 24 4 .14% 580 163 59 92 21 335 10 HOME SUSP. 25 59.52% 4 9.52% 10 23.81% 3 7.14% 42 21 4 10 3 38 11 BOYS CLUB 51 67.11% 9 11. 84% 16 21.05% 0 .00% 76 38 8 12 0 58 16 EXPULSION 1 50.00% 1 50.00% 0 .00% 0 .00% 2 1 1 0 0 2 1 9 9 2 - 9 3 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- Total m1mher of aR:,igrments: # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT Actual ~tudents involved: # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 302 43.20% 167 23.89% 163 23.32% 67 9.59% 699 133 94 80 37 344 10 HOME SUSP. 32 65.31% 6 12.24% 7 14.29% 4 8.16% 49 28 6 7 4 45 11 BOYS CLUB 45 61.64% 16 21. 92% 10 13.70% 2 2. 74% 73 39 13 8 2 62 16 EXPULSION 5 71. 43% 1 14.29% 1 14.29% 0 .00% 7 5 1 1 0 7 COMPARISION -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- Total nunber- of assignments: # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT Actual students involved: # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 11- 3.51-% 67 67.00 % 20 13.99 % 43 179.17 % 119 30- 35 12- 16 9 10 HOME SUSP. 7 28.00 % 2 50.00 % 3- 30.00-% 1 33.33 % 7 7 2 3- 1 7 11 BOYS CLUB 6- 11.76-% 7 77.78 % 6- 37.50-% 2 200.00 % 3- 1 5 4- 2 4 16 EXPULSION 4 400.00 % 0 .00 % 1 100.00 % 0 .00 % 5 4 0 1 0 5 ), Z-4 REF: DIS032 NORTHL ITI'LE ROCKS CHOOLD ISTRICT Suspension/Expulsion Comparisons Run Date: 7 /22/93 DISTRICT LEVEL From AUGUST Through JUNE -------- .------------------------------------------------------------------===== 1 9 9 1 - 9 2 =----------------------------------------------------------------==-=====--==-== -----BM------ Total nunher of assigments: # REF PCT /TOT Actual students involved: # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU ==---------------------------------------------------------------------------=== 09 S.A.C. 707 46.57% 332 21. 87% 343 168 10 HOME SUSP. 71 57.72% 25 20.33% 63 20 11 BOYS CLUB 245 60.20% 75 18.43% 185 61 16 EXPULSION 4 80.00% 1 20.00% 4 1 1 9 9 2 - 9 3 -----BM------ rota1 number of assigr,nents: # REF PCT /TOT Actual students involved: # STU 09 S.A.C. 915 44.61% 284 10 HOME SUSP. 148 50.86% 116 11 BOYS CLUB 295 59.60% 177 16 EXPULSION 6 60.00% 6 -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 487 23.74% 189 70 24.05% 50 99 20.00% 72 3 30.00% 3 379 24.97% 226 24 19.51% 23 73 17.94% 63 0 .00% 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 491 23.94% 181 59 20.27% 48 90 18.18% 59 1 10.00% 1 100 6.59% 67 3 2.44% 3 14 3.44% 12 0 .00% 0 -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 158 7.70% 71 14 4.81% 11 11 2.22% 9 0 .00% 0 1518 804 123 109 407 321 5 5 2051 725 291 225 495 317 10 10 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISION -----BM------ rota1 number of .,.,e,,ments: # REF PCT/TOT Actual students involved.  # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 208 29.42 % 155 46.69 % 112 29.55 % 58 58.00 % 533 59- 21 45- 4 79- 10 HOME SUSP. 77 108.45 % 45 180.00 % 35 145.83 % 11 366.67 % 168 53 30 25 8 116 11 BOYS CLUB 50 20.41 % 24 32.00 % 17 23.29 % 3- 21. 43-% 88 8- 11 4- 3- 4- 16 EXPULSION 2 50.00 % 2 200.00 % 1 100.00 % 0 .00 % 5 2 2 1 0 5 Z-1 REF: DIS032 Suspension/Expulsion Comparisons Run Date: 7/22/93 ELEMENTARKY-6 From AUGUST Through JUNE ----------------------------------------------------------------------==-======= 1 9 9 1 - 9 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------======== -----BM------ -----BF------ rotai number of .,,,ignnents: # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT /TOT Actual students involved: # STU # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU =---------------------------------------------------------------------===-====== 09 S.A.C. 0 .00% 0 .00% 0 .00% 0 .00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 24 64.86% 8 21.62% 5 13.51% 0 .00% 37 22 6 5 0 33 11 BOYS CLUB 131 60.37% 38 17.51% 40 18.43% 8 3.69% 217 103 32 36 7 178 16 EXPULSION 0 .00% 0 .00% 0 .00% 0 .00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 2 - 9 3 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- Total number of \"\"igr,nents: # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT Actu.,l students involved: # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .00% 0 .00% 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 60 59.41% 18 17.82% 47 12 11 BOYS CLUB 162 59.34% 49 17.95% 99 35 16 EXPULSION 0 .00% 0 .00% 0 0 COMPARISION -----BM------ rota1 number of assignments: # REF PCT /TOT Actual students involved  # STU -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .00% 0 21 20.79% 16 58 21. 25% 38 0 .00% 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .00% 0 2 1.98% 2 4 1.47% 3 0 .00% 0 -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 101 77 273 175 0 0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .00 % 0 .00 % 0 .00 % 0 .00 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 36 150.00 % 10 125.00 % 16 320.00 % 2 200.00 % 64 25 6 11 2 44 11 BOYS CLUB 31 23.66 % 11 28.95 % 18 45.00 % 4- 50.00-% 56 4- 3 2 4- 3- 16 EXPULSION 0 .00 % 0 .00 % 0 .00 % 0 .00 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z-2 ,   DISCIPLINE INFORMATION REFERRALS ACTIONS TAKEN (Please attach computer generated information) 23  '1: DISC1a Discipli111TYR efernl S....ry.-By P19e 1 IUU.ATM Rtf1rnl Ranon 9nJJl'f2 D LI11l m ~ sam. - w12 -TIJTrL-- ---a.ta-- ---tOf-lJa-- Code Dascriptian Totll Ptt Pu Can Tot,l Ptt P1r Con Tot1l Ptt Pu Can 01 Disr191rd for dir1etions of t11chen REFERRAL2S4 ~.oox 15 14 23.m 9 10 16.661 6 .. idalnlstr1tors. STtmE\u0026gt;fTS 22 39.2.SX 13 14 25.00X 9 8 14.2SX 4 r191rd for dir1etions of bas drivers, REFERRALS 1 1.661 0 1 1.661 0 0 .oox 0 lanch ,idK, or other 111thorizasdc hool Sl\\lE(l'S 1 1.78X 0 1 1.7BX 0 0 .oox 0 penonrwl. OJ Disrtlan .ind/or intM\"ftrera with the REFERfW.S 5 8.331 3 5 s.m 3 0 .oox 0 norul ind orderly condw:to f school S1lllOOS 5 8.92X 3 5 8.92X 3 0 .oox 0 1nd school1POll5Dr,lcdt iv it in. 04 JIRhlviotrh lt inOlvesi ndlcent. ind/or REFERRAL0S .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 iMOr1l ,cts. snmrs 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 05 Wi9fif II I or IIIY for of 9HDl i Ill, REFERRALS0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 S1llDTS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 06 PhYSicll ibue or HSillt or thr11ttned REFERfW.S 2 3.33X 1 2 3.m 1 0 .oox 0 ph)'Sic1l lbue to  school lO)'le, STlllENTS 2 3.571 1 2 3.571 1 0 .oox 0 07 Physlcll lbue or 1ss11lt or thrNtened REFERRALS 2 3.331 2 2 3.331 2 0 .oox 0 physic,l lbue to othlr st.dent or IIY  STlllENTS 2 3.571 2 2 3.571 2 0 .oox 0 othllr individul. 08 Pos1e11ian of, knife, ruor, ic1 pick, REFERM.S 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 espl05iw, pistol, rifl1, shotvm, snmrs 0 .oox 0 0 .OOI 0 0 .oox 0 pellet 1111o1r 1ny other abjact thit un be cansiderad  IINPOfl or dilllJl!l'OIS instnnt. 09 Using, offtrint for s,le or selling IIEFEJM.S 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 1lcmollc IMMrlCJIS or 1ny n1rcotic dr119 STlllENTS 0 .oox 0 0 .OOI 0 0 .oox 0 ,s dlfinld by Arhl'ISH lill or School Bolrd Policy, 10 DKtrw:t ian of or the ,tt..,t to destray REFERRALS 0 .oox 0 0 .OOI 0 0 .oox 0  1 prqierty. STIIOTS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 11 int or the 1tte1Pt to st11l school IIEFEJM.S 1 1.661 1 1 1.661 1 0 .oox 0 pro,erty or the property belonging to STlllENTS 1 1.78X 1 t 1.7BX 1 0 .oox 0 1nother individul. 12 ChNti111 or co,ying the of ,nother REFERRALS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .OOI 0 student. STlllEHTS 0 .oox 0 0 .OOI 0 0 .OOI 0 13 Fi ln to ibide by ,ttmi.nc:e rates. REFERRAL2S0 33.33X 15 12 20.00X 8 8 13.m 7 STUllENTS 19 33.92X 14 12 21.Q 8 1 12.SOX 0 14 Useo f prof,nity, valpr 1111111o11r REFERfW.S 4 6.661 3 4 6.66X 3 0 .oox 0 absc1111l1 111utt. ST1JOTS 3 5.35X 2 3 5.35X 2 0 .oox 0 15 Cc:aitting extortion, coercion, bl1ek- REfERIW.S 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 ui l or forcing 1nothlr person to Kt snmns 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 thrCMl9hth e ne of force or thr11t of force. 16 ETIIPiinJt in wrbl l lbues nch H ~ REFERRALS1 1.661 0 1 1.661 0 0 .oox 0 c1lli119, ethnic or r,ci1l slll's, or STUllENTS 1 i.78X 0 1 i.78X 0 0 .oox 0 usint dlr091tory stateaents to other st.dents, school perSOlllll!lo r other individuls. 17 Hiz i119. REFERRAL0S .OOI 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 STUllENTS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 18 w119 relted t1ttivities. REFERIW.S 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 ST\\WfTS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .OOI 0 TIJTf(. REFERIW.S6 0 ~ 42 70.00X '17 18 30.00X 13 - STUIDTS 56 36 41 73.211 26 15 26.781 10 Raf, D190i3il Disciplinary RlrilPITiSl uM,ry )y 91Y)/f2 CUii.AIDE Action T1un NJmtL ITTLEm HIQ4! Dill. - 11/12 --TUT#l.-- -rua- ----fOf-k.Aa-- :s:rlption Totil Ptt Pu Con Tot1l Ptt Pu Con Tot1l Ptt PIT Con 01 Conferenc i th Student ACTIIJIS 9 15.00X 3 8 1J.m 3 1 1.661 0 Sl1IEITS 9 1S.25X 3 8 13.551 3 1 1.691 0 02 Conf.,-anc ith Puent ACTIIJIS 2 3.m 2 0 .oox 0 2 J.m 2 STlllOO'S 2 3.B 2 0 .oox 0 2 3.B 2 03 Conferancei th Student ind P1rent ACTIIJIS 2 3.331 2 2 3.m 2 0 .oox 0 STIIIOOS 2 3.381 2 2 3.381 2 0 .oox 0 04 Privi l\"6 Denied flCTIIJIS 1 1.661 1 1 1.661 1 0 .oox 0 STUDENTS 1 1.691 1 1 1.691 1 0 .oox 0 05 B1hnior Contnct ACTIIJIS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 STUDEHTS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 06 DetentionH ill ACTIIJIS 7 11.661 2 4 6.661 1 3 s.oox 1 STUDEHTS 7 11.Blil 2 4 6.77X 1 3 S.081 1 07 Stldlnt Yi l l Kak ~ Ti ACTIIJIS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 Sl1IEITS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 08 StllNllt Pl1eed on PrabltiCII ICTIIJIS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 ST1IIENTS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 09 On CilfU 6apersion (S.A.C.\u0026gt; ICTitl6 24 40.00X 20 15 Z5.00X 12 9 15.00X 8 ST1IIENTS 23 38.981 19 15 Z5.42X 12 8 13.m 7 10 tmR Sa,eiision ICTIIJ6 1 1.661 1 1 1.661 1 0 .oox 0 STUIOTS 1 1.691 1 1 1.691 1 0 .oox 0 11 bl Cllb Sa,eniion ICTIIJIS 3 S.OOI 2 3 s.oox 2 0 .OOI 0 STUDEHTS 3 s.oex 2 3 s.oex 2 0 .oox 0 12 Bu Sapefsion ICTIN 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 ST1IIENTS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 1-ardiy School ACTIIJIS 9 15.00X 5 7 11.661 4 2 3.331 1 STUDEHTS 9 15.25X s 7 11.861 4 2 3.381 1 14 Recoaende[dJp llsion ACTIIJIS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 STUDEHTS 0 .OOI 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 15 othtr ACTIIJIS 2 3.331 2 1 1.661 1 1 1.661 1 snmTS 2 3.381 2 1 1.691 1 1 1.691 1 16 Eq,ll1i0111 ICTIIJIS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 snmTS 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 0 .oox 0 TOTILA CTIIJIS 60 40 42 70.00X 27 18 30.00X 13 snmrs 59 39 42 71.181 27 17 28.B11 12   COHPREIIENSIVOEU TCOHY.S.V ALUATION (COE) SURVEYR ESULTS (If applicable, please insert after this page) 24  I J NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION NORTH LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS _ 1991 ARKANSASC OMPREHENSIVSEC HOOLI MPROVEMENPTL AN Arkansas D~pQrtment of Education - School: North Little Rock High School - West Year: 1991-92 District: North Little Rock School Superintendent: James R. Smith TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Coi:mnitment from District ..................... 1 Letter of Commitment from Principal .................... 2 Introduction . .......................................... 3 Overview of the Improvement Plan ....................... 5 COE Steering Coi:mnittee ................................. 7 Target Area Conuni ttees . ................................ 8 Review of Data ........................................ 10 Description of School and Comrnunity ................... 12 Mission Statement and Goals ........................... 15 Mission Statement ..................................... 16 Monitoring and Assessment of Student Achievement ...... 17 School Climate . ....................................... 24 Parent/Community Involvement .......................... 28 High Expectations ..................................... 32 THE NORTH 1LrITlLE ROCJK PllIBLIC SCHOOL -ADM!NISTR1UIVE OFFICES 2700 POPLAFi STREET COE Steering Committee North Little Rock High School-West Campus 101 West Main Street North Little Rock, AR 72114 Dear Committee Members: The administrative staff of the North Little Rock School District is committed to assisting the faculty of North Little Rock High School West Campus with the implementation of their Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation Plan which was developed over the past several months. The four areas targeted for improvement are in concert with district priorities established by the Board of Education. We recognize the value of this introspective school improvement process and pledge our support for the school's plan. Sincerely, ~Lt James R. Smith Superintendent of Schools dw P.O. BOX 687, NORTH LITTLE ROCK, AR 72115/0687 501/771-8000 November 19, 1991 Dear Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation Visiting Team: 101 West 22nd Street North Little Rock, Arkansas7 2114 (501) 771-8100 Since the fall of 1990, I have observed our staff working tirelessly and diligently in planning for the future of North Little Rock High SchoolWest. The commitment and dedication displayed by the entire community has been an inspiration to all who have witnessed the rebirth of North Little Rock High School. It is with great enthusiasm that I fully endorse and pledge my commitment to the plans for the future of North Little Rock High SchoolWest as set forth by our Comprenensive Outcomes Evaluation plan. s ly,\n/ Ari?.~\nlompsbn, Kin~pal North Little Rock High School-West 2 INTRODUCT:i:ON North Little Rock High, West Campus, began its Comprehensive Outcome Evaluation (COE) Improvement Plan in November of 1990. Actually the school was a new school because of the reorganization of two former high schools, Ole Main and Ncrtheast\nthus, some data from both former high schools had to be obtained\nhowever, most of the staff was formerly from Northeast or Ole Main. The Steering Committee, reflecting a cross section of the faculty and staff, began to gather statistics and administer the perceptual surveys to a sampling of parents from different demographic areas, to all students administered by the English teachers, and to the faculty and staff members. Parents assisted in the mailing of surveys to parents. Concurrently, the school's mission statement and goals committee, comprised of faculty and community people, began its report. Other committees, such as the School and Community, earnestly began. Sirice COE is a new process, informational meetings were held. After receiving the surveys, the Dawson Educational Service Cooperative in Arkadelphia tabulated the results\nin addition, North Little Rock High's computer instructor, utilizing the statistical materials, developed charts making the results more visual. Each committee chairman prese11ted an in-depth report to the faculty. Based on the analyses of all data, including the archival, achievement, and perceptual, the faculty unanimously decided on the following target areas: 1. HIGH EXPECTATIONS 2. SCHOOL CLIMATE 3. PARENT/COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 4. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT/TIME ON TASK (MANDATORY) Committee chairmen, selected from the Steering Committee, and vice-chairmen were chosen for each area\nagain after examining the data, the chairmen, vice-chairmen, and subcommittees selected outcomes. After numerous meetings, the chairmen, vice-chairmen, and committee members formulated detailed improvement plans designed to eliminate the disparities revealed in the baseline data. The criteria for each outcome were completed during the spring of 1991. During the summer the Steering CoIDmittee Chairman and target area chairmen met to check for repetition. In e\u0026amp;sence, the Improvement Plan for the target areas were finalized\nhowever, after some of the improvement areas were identified in the plan, actions were immediately begun fer implementation for the 1991-92 school year. The faculty was again apprised of the study, modifications, and final results. 3 The faculty, staff, and administration of North Little Rock High, West Campus, recognize that the Improvement Plan is an ambitious document\nhowever, with the combined efforts of the students, staff, administration, and community, not only will these issues in the five-year plan be addressed, but other concerns will be addressed because the school is dedicated to student growth. 4 Respectfully submitted, Billie Jo White Emogene Wetherington OVERVIEW OF THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN The four targets and the desired outcomes form the basis for the school improveme~t plan. The action plan is designed to achieve the outcomes established for each target. TARGET: Monito1:ing and Assessment of Student Achievement/ Time on Task OUTCOXES 1. To increase enrollment in academically challenging courses and maintain thet enrollment throughout the school year with particular attention given to. increasing minority student participdtion. 2. To improve student success on standardized tests and in the classroom. 3. To increase student time on task. 1. 2. TARGET: School Climate OUTCm!ES To increase student perception of the schocl as a safe environment. To increase the level of satisfaction teachers feel about their jobs and their work environment. 3. To increase student perception of school rules, policies, and disciplinary actions as fair and equitable. TARGET: Parent/Community Involvement OUTCOMES 1. To increase the involvement oi the business community in the school programs. 2. To increase the involvement of parents in the school programs. 3. To improve involvement o= the non-business community in school programs. 5 'I\"ARGET: High Expectations OUTCOMES 1. To implement programs that will aid \"at-risk\" students in mastering requirements for graduation. 2. To promote the use of instructional techniques and policies that convey high teacher expectations for all students. 3. To expand the use of classroom strategies designed to encourage interactions that promote critical thinking skills and problem solving abilities. 6 North Little Rock High School-West Campus COE Steering Committee Emogene Wetherington, Chairperson Penny Clay, Reporter Pris Benson Ron Brown Greg Burl Anita Cameron Linda Fuller Liz Fulton Tom Hudson Rena Knight Patsy Pearson Sue Perry Betty Sneed Roy Spradlin Mary Taylor Billie Jo White 7 North Little Rock High School-West Campus Monitoring and Assessment of Student Achievement/ Time on Task Committee Betty Sneed, Chairman Bill Garvin, Vice-Chairman Phyllis Doerr Eulin Downing Geraldine Garrett Ron Ingram David Kaufman Mar::orie Kirby Sallie Langford Sam Mascuilli Carol McAdams Darrell McCoy Mary Power Roseanne Sallis Ira Scoggins Harold Stark Mike Tucker Phyllis Wiggins High Expectations Committee Liz Fulton, Chairman Monica Davis, Vice-Chairman Glen Amis Jim Billings Steve Dar.iels J inuny Harper Lou Hart Quilla Lanes Jim McMurry Christine McRae John Narkinsky Trish Partridge Suzzette Reynolds Jon Robbins Mary Lee Schultz Mildred Standley Johnny Talley Carol Toombs Tammy Tucker 8 North Little Rock High School-West Campus School Climate Committee Rena Knight, Chairman Berdell Ward, Vice-Chairman Helen Casteel Johnnie Collier Ann Cowart Gary Davis Cheryl Fallis Patrina Greenway Annie Hamilton Faith Jones Donnas McGinley Carl Moore Don Robbins Jackie Ryan Jan Scholl Kathy Smith George Thompson Willie Vincent Joe Ward Parent-Community Involvement Committee Patsy Pearson, Chairman Cynthia Hampton, Vice-Chairman Shelia Baker Sue Beach Bill Bowers Gwen Brooks Louise Cammack Cheryl Daniels Kay Ewart Rick Gravette Gary Haver Gail Hopkins Fred Johnson Ron Kieklak Shelia Smith Paul Stovall Billy Wagley 9 REVIEW OF DATA Members of the Steering Committee gathered archival, achievement, and perceptual data on which to base the school improvement plan. ARCHIVAL DATA The archival data included personnel information on certified and non-certified staff members\nstatistics about students' attendance rates, family environment, and participation in extracurricular activities\nand detailed information about the instructional program. Archival data indicated strengths in the following areas: a highly educated, experienced staff\na comprehensive instructional program, and an extensive student activity program. Approximately 70% of the faculty members hold masters' degrees and above. Specific strengths of the instructional program include the Advanced Placement courses, the television production program, and the computer lab facilities for math and reading instruction. The student activity program includes 44 student organizations that meet on a rtgularly scheduled basis within the school day. Therefore, all students have the opportunity to participate in extracurricular activities and are encouraged to do so. Archival data revealed the following areas of disparity: The percentage of minority students enrolled in advanced courses was low. The nunilier of students selecting lower level courses was considered excessive. The absentee/tardy rates for all students needed improvement. These concerns are addressed in the following targets: Monitoring and assessment of student achievement and high expectations. ACHIEVEMENT DATA The achievement data wa$ obtained through records from the school guidance office and the district's offices of instructional services and computer services. Included in the information compiled are grade distribution records, MAT-6 scores, ACT profiles, PSAT scores, lists of scholarships awarded, lists of state and regional awards received, and lists of students receiving honors for outstanding achievement. A significant area of strength is in the number and amount of scholarships awarded to g~aduating seniors. Another area of strength is in the number of state and regional awards received by students in the speech and drama department. 10 A five-year summary of ACT scores shows that our composite score of 19.9 represents a steady increase since 1988-89. For the first time in five years, our composite score is at the state average. Twenty-eight percent of students taking the ACT in 1990-91 were black. The composite score report by ethnic groups shows a 3.6 point difference in the scores of black and white students. Only 34% of black students taking the ACT had the college-core curriculum as compared to 44% of white students. Steps are being taken to encourage all students to complete the strongest courses in which they can be successful. The summary report of the Metropolitan Achievement Test, 6th edition, which was administered to eleventh graders in April 1991, shows an overall basic battery percentile of 56.6. This average indicates that our students scored above the 50th percentile nationally. The test data also reveals a 22.2 percentage norm discr1:pancy between scores for white students and those of minority students. Reducing this disparity while raising the overall test scores is a desired outcome of the improvement plan. PERCEPTUAL DATA The perceptual data was based on the opinions of students, parents, and certified staff members and was obtained through surveys designed for each group. Parent volunteers assisted in mailing surveys to a random sampling of parents. Surveys were distributed through the English classes to all students. All faculty members also completed the opinion surveys. All groups surveyed indicated the following areas of strength: Clear school purpose, monitoring and assessment of student achievement, and high exp~ctations. The opinions of parents, students, and teachers varied on some of the correlates. Although the results of the surveys were generally positive, some variances occurred in the areas of school climate and parent and community involvement. There was a slight discrepancy in the attitudes of students toward the school as a safe environment and the attitudes of their teachers and parents. The surveys also showed a perceptual difference in the area of fairness as related to the administraticn of discipline. There was also a discrepancy in the attitudes of the students, parents, and teachers regarding the degree to _which parents and other members of the community are involved in the school. These areas of discrepancy are addressed in he improvement plan. 11 . DESCRIPTION OF SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY The city of North Little Rock lies just across the Arkansas River from Little Rock. An estimated 61,700 persons live in North Little Rock. That figure represents a 6% decrease in population in the ten-year period from 1980 to 1990. The median age of about 33 years is increasing, and the school age population percentage is decreasing. Approximately 79% of the residents are white, 20% black, and 1% other minorities. Studies indicate that the black population percentage in North Little Rock is increasing while the white population percentage is decreasing. Of the existing labor force in the city, the largest percentage of workers hold management or professional positions (24.3%), while 19% have administrative or clerical jobs, and 12.3% are in service fields. The remainder of the work force is made up of sales people (11.8%), skilled craft workers (11.8%), unskilled laborers (16.7%), and those in technical fields (3.4%). The remaining .7% make up the workers representing fields other than those listed. Although industrial development in North Little Rock is restricted by boundaries on all sides, there are positive economic indicators for the school and community. While the unemployment rate in Greater Little Rock is 7.6% the citizens in North Little Rock are at 4.6%. In 1989 voters approved a 4.9 mill school tax increase on real property. This millage increase is an excellent indicator of the community interest and support of public education in North Little Rock. Cultural and recreational facilities in North Little Rock include the Laman Public Library, the Community Band, the Old Mill, Wild River Country, Riverfront Park, and the North Little Rock Community Center. Within minutes of North Little Rock are the Arkansas Arts Center, the Arkansas Symphony Orchestra, The Arkansas Ballet, and the Arkansas Repertory Theatre. The area also offers the Arkansas Museum of Science and History, the Little Rock Zoo, and a number of state parks, lakes, streams, camping and hunting areas, and hiking trails. The North Little Rock School District is serving 9,194 students in the 1990-91 school year. The city's demographic trends are reflected in the school population, which has decreased in recent years. Of the total enrollment, 52.3% are white, 46.5 are black, and 1.2% represent other minorities. The racial composition has also paralleled the city's trend of declining white population and increasing black population. 12 The 1990-91 school year is the first year for implementing the reorganized secondary school plan. This reorganization process was completed by the \"Planning Task force for Secondary Reorganization,\" which included 39 committees and subcommittees made up of parents, teachers, students, administrators, and citizens. Beginning in 1990-91, the North Little Rock School District changed to one high school on two campuses and three middle schools. All 9th and 10th graders attend the North Little Rock High School East Campus with an enrollment of 1,372. All 11th and 12th graders attend the North Little Rock High School West Campus with an enrollment of 1,180. Seventh and eighth graders attend Lakewood, Ridgeroad, or Rose City Middle Schools, depending on residence and school attendance zones. This reorganization allows the racial makeup of the secondary schools to reflect the racial. makeup of the community as a whole. The administration of the North Little Rock School District operates under policies established by a Board of Education. The School Board was reorganized in 1989 from a six-member at large board to a seven-member geographic zone board to allow for a more equal representation of the various races and socioeconomic groups in North Little Rock. Positions are for alternating three-year terms, and elections are held each September. The North Little Rock School District has established a number of programs to meet better the needs of minority students. The position of Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation was established in March 1990 to ensure racial equity. An activity director at each secondary campus works toward greater minority student participation in extracurricular activities. Compensatory education programs have expanded, and staff development opportunities have been implemented for improved understanding of students who achieve below grade level. Free bus transportation is now provided for all students living more than two miles from schools. District-wide trends indicate that the North Little Rock schools are expanding services and improving educational opportunities for all students: -A greater percentage of public school students graduate than ever before. -The standardized testing program has expanded to include students in grades 1 through 11. -Special education programs are offered to hundreds of students with a variety of learning disabilities and handicaps. 13 -Hundreds of students are in programs for the gifted and talented. -More than 500 computers provide for individualized, self-paced instruction. -Schools work with students to reduce drug and alcohol use. -North Little Rock students consistently earn top awards in regional, state and national competitions in math, history, vocational education, music, art and other subject areas. -More than 100 scholarships were awarded to 1990 graduating seniors. The North Little Rock School District is following the national trend of community involvement in its education development. With the reorganization of the secondary schools in the district, parents and other residents served as advisors on reorganization committees. The Classmate Program teams schools with businesses in the community. These business partners reward student achievement, recognize teacher achievement, provide materials and services, and help schools reach their goals. The Student Incentive Program at North Little Rock High School is designed to recognize and reward student excellence in academic performance, attendance, activity involvement, and citizenship. The Incentive Program is based on a cooperative effort of the school and area businesses tu reward students with discounts at the community businesses. After the first nine weeks of operation, there was a 74.2% increase in students qualifying for the program. The community has also been involved in the creation of the television production program on the West Campus. Through a grant and city funding, a television studio was installed to broadcast City Council meetings. A strong PTSA (Parent, Teacher, Student Association) provides assistance for students and teachers in the North Little Rock School District. Parents and other residents also serve as advisors on academic area committees and other special topic committees that are established to consider school issues. The interest of North Little Rock residents in their schools and their individual neighborhoods results in local involvement, improved services, and community pride. 14 Mission Statement and Goals The chairman of the committee met with the Steering Committee November 14 and November 28 to receive information, data, and guidelines for direction to proceed. After several conversations with Steering Chairs Wetherington and White, and an organizational meeting of the Mission Statement and Goals Committee, surveying the educational community - students, teachers, parents - became the number one priority. In order to develop a surve:, instrument, the committee decided to formulate a list of goals based on existing philosophies: administrative priorities for 1990-91 and objectives from past evaluation processes. After the chair gathered the pertinent data, members of the committee met in a lengthy, writing session. Six goals were for~ulated and sent to a cross sampling of classes: basic, regular, and honors English, as well as special education and other disciplines. The PTA P~esident took surveys to meetings with parents for their input. All teachers on the staff were surveyed. A second draft added three goals based on the data collected. A final survey produced one additional goal for the committee, making a comprehensive list of ten goals in the final draft. Using these ten goals, the committee developed the Mission Statement, which was presented to the Steering Committee in January and was accepted. In the fall of 1991, the chair met with representatives of the East Campus, for their input. Based en their findings, two goals were modified and the final Mission Statement completed. West Campus sue Perry, Chair Sylvia Allen Marilyn Carter Cynthia Hampton Mala Rogers MISSIOO SI'ATEMENT With a carmitrnent to provide experience, opportunities and challenges where irrlividuality is acknowledged and maximum potential can be realized, North Little Rock High School values people, ideas, and learninJ. * * * * -* Goals The curriculmn must be designed to educate all youth so that they may becane productive and responsible citizens of our country and world. The cu..rriculum should provide multicultural experiences which enable students to learn to respect irrlividuals, their cultural differences, and the interdependence of people through a study of histo.cy, gt\n!()(Jraphy, and varied cultures of the nation and the world. The curriculum must provide instnlction which enables students to learn basic skills in matherratics and reading, as well as to achieve canpetence in oral and written ccmnunication. The curricuhnn must provide an enviroment in which students learn to think critically in order to make infonred decisions so that they may attain self-respect ru1d self-discipline. The curriculum must be designed to raise the cultural level of the a:mrn.uut.y by developing within the student an appreciation of art, literature, il!ld music. * The curriculum must be designed to nurture adaptability in students so that they may achieve their full IX)tential and nay realize that many of the jcbs in which they will work have not yet been created. * 'lhe curriculum must be designed to meet the special needs and abilities of our students on all levels. * The curriculum should offer o:wortuni ties for students to learn market-ready skills through a variety of work-related programs. * The curriculun must offer students a varied program of school-related activities focusing on the developrent of lE:adership skills, service to the school and camnmity, involverrE11t, and cooperation. * The curriculum must bE: designed to develop the whole person intellectually, physically, arotionally, and socially. 16 TARGET NARRATIVE MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT/TIME ON TASK Beginning in March 1991, this committee reviewed the archival, perceptual, and achievement data for the school to identify areas in need of improvement. Committee merr~ers isolated three areas directly impacting student achievement: increasing time on task, improving student success un standardized tests and in the classroom, and increasing and maintaining enrollment in advanced classes. The committee felt particular attention must be paid to the achievement of minority students in each of these areas. A subcommittee was assigned to each outcome. Each subcommittee conducted additional research into its outcome before considering specific actions to address the outcome. A survey of enrollments in advanced courses (advanced, college bound, GT, AP) revealed a lower percentage of minority students in these courses. Teachers in all subject areas expressed concerns regarding students dropping to a \"lower level\" course or initially selecting a \"lower level\" course rather than meeting the challenges of the advanced courses. The data for absentee/tardies revealed a rate higher than desirable for all students. Teachers also expressed concerns over the amount of class time missed due to interruptions and absences. A review of MAT-6 scores showed a significant discrepancy between scores for white students and those of minority students. This same discrepancy could also be noted in the current GPA data. Once the data was reviewed, each subcommittee considered specific actions to address the desired outcomes. The preliminary improvement plans were presented for consideration to the whole committee. Suggestions were offered and incorporated by the subcommittees. Final inprovement plans were submitted to the Steering Committee in April 1991. 17 00  IMPi PLAN Target:IDNI'IORING AND1 \\SSl'SSMENOTF S'!UDENI' ACHIEVEMENI'/'l'IOMNE T ASK  OUtcare:'ro increase enrollment in acadanically challenging cwrses and maintain that enrollment throughout the school year with partic.'Ular attention given to increasing minority student participation. ACTICNS RFSPCNSIBILITY TIMELINE RFSCOOCES STAFFD EVEWPMENr EVAWATIClD-1A TA 1. Develop ways to GUJ.dance Inplarent Student Explanation and List of potential identify students for counselors, 1991-92 achieverrent interpretation of students. acadanically Teachers Re-check data, Student test scores challenging cwrses Principal each year records, Of:portunities for based on test scores, teachers teachers guidance to past performance, conference teacher reccmnendation, etc. ' 2. R!:!fine and e.'ql\u0026lt;Uld Principal, Initiate Brochures, Opportunities for CaTiparisoo of current procedures for Guidi:ince Spring 1992 Curriculum teachers and guidance to enrollnent to that of providing Counselors, Expand in Booklets, discuss ccurse content previous years. infonnation to students Dept. Chairman, 1992-93 Choices Program and teacher and parents conoenring Teachers Newsletters expectations. the challenges, Camri.ttee St:ooent Leaders oi:portunities, and Coordinator Cwrse Cootent expectations in these Guides courses. 3. Establish a procedure Priocipal, Preliminary Canputer lists O:mnittee of parents, Caiparison of to make it nore Guidance, plans, of enrollment Camselors, Teachers dropout/transfer difficult for students Teachers 5Pring 1992 and other interested rate in current year. to change to less Expand in faculty to hear requests Monitor grade reports challenging ccurses. 1992-93 for schedule changes. to detennine success Revise as rate. needed 4. Establish procedures Principal, Preliminary Professional Infonn parents, teachers, Students grades and for intervention with Dept. Cllairman, plans, Fall publication, and students of programs dropout/transfer students having Teachf:rs 1992 District available. Carmittee rates carpared to difficulty in these FUll .i.rrple- curriculum of teachers to those of previoos courses before dropout/ mentation specialist reccmnend programs. years. transfer occurs. SPring 1993-94 TARGET NARRATIVE SCHOOL CLIMATE A review of the perceptual and archival data available led our committee to select the following desired outcomes to facilitate the improvement of the school climate: 1. To increase student perception of the school as a safe environment. 2. To increase the level of satisfaction teachers feel about their jobs and their work environment. 3. To increase student perception of school rules, policies, and disciplinary actions as fair and equitable. Using the surveys which hac been administered to students, parents, and students as our basis, we identified a discrepancy in the attitudes of students toward the-school as a safe environment and the attitudes of their teachers and parents. Teachers and parents were overwhelmingly positive in their views of the school environment as a safe place to be. On two separate questions relating to safety, teachers recorded positive responses of 72% and 89%. Only 7% and 8% of teachers responded negatively to these questions. Parents' responses were similar. On two safety questions, they replied 87% and 82% positively, with only 6% and 11% negatives. However, students registered only 65% positive in this area while 35% expressed a negative attitude toward the school as a safe environment. Only teacher data was used to target the area of teacher morale. While 80% of teachers had indicated that morale was a positive element in the school climate, this area had the lowest \"always\" rating (7%) of any question on the teachers' survey. It also had the highest negative rating with 20%. Surveys showed at least a perceptual difference in the area of fairness as related to the administration of discipline. Thirty-four percent of the teachers felt that treatment of students was always fair. Another 54% felt that it is sometimes fair for a positive rating of 88%. Parents generally agreed with teachers in this area with 77% responding positively to a fairness question. However, this issue did draw an 11% negative from parents, the highest negative rating from this group. Students registered a high degree of dissatisfaction in responding to a question on fairness with a 41% negative response. Only 9% of students felt that discipline is always administered fairly while another 47% thought that it was sometimes. Once these outcomes were selected on the basis of the data listed above, a subcommittee was appointed to develop improvement plans for each outcome. The subcommittees met over several weeks, developing their plans. The plans were submitted to the chairman and the vice-chairman of the target committee for approval. Some were returned for \"-fine-tuning\" and the elimination of duplications. The final versions of these plans are attached. 24  IMPi PLI\\N Target:MCM:TORINGA NDA SSESSMENOT F S'IUDENr ACHIEVll1EN.l'/TIMOE N TASK  Outcare:To increase enrollrrent in aCTldanically challenging ccurses and maintain that enrollmmt throughout the school year with particular attention given to increasing minority student participation. ACTIOOS IID3PCNSIBILITY TIMELINE RESOURCES STAFF' DEVEWPMENI' EVALUATIOmO TA 5. Implement incentive Departnental Inplement NLR TV, Departnental Staff Number and list of. programs within ccurses Staff Fall 1991 School dete:anines workable incentives uses. so students can Recheck Newspaper, ideas and activities Number of students achieve success and be each year Bulletin receiving recognized for their Boards, reoognitico. efforts: i.e. Exhibits, Crnpetitions, Local Publication of work, Businesses etc. N 0  IMP~ PLAN Target:l'Oll'IORING AND l\\SSESSMENl' OF S'IUDENT ACIIIEVEMEN'l'/TIME 00 TASK Outcane:'l'o inprove student success on i\ntandardizE..'CIte sts and in the classroan. l\\CTIONS RESPrnSIBILITY TIMELINE RESOURCES STAFF DEVEIOFMENI' 1. Inplement programs Principal, Trial run Test Prep. Meeting of cannittees designed to prarote Guidance 1991-92 Manuals, and staff to encourage suocess on Counselors, Fully Professicoal cross-curricular starrlarclized tests. Teachers implemented Journals involvement. Staff a. Establish before/ 1992-93 meeting to review skills after school to be taught. tutoring sessions in test-taking skills b. Provide canpute.r Principal, Add to and District Explanation of what in software for the Media Specialist update Mooia available. canputer lab to holdings Services, prepare students each year Canputer for a variety of Vendors tests. c. Encourage teachers Principal, !nplement Professional Departmental inservice to~ a variety of Dept. Chainnan, 1992-93 Publications, on relevant testing testing styles. Director of and recheck District styles Secondary each year CUrriculum Education Specialists 2. Inplenent progr= designed to encourage a higher success rate in the classroan. a. Develop before and Principal, Trial run Guidance Meetings of ccmnittees after school Dept. Chairman, Spring 1992 counselors, and st.aff to encourage tutoring sessioos Teachers Fully Professional cross-curricular for study skills implemented Publications involvement. and content in 1992-93 required subjects.  EVAlllATIOND ATA Report on student scores as reported by testing services. Report on student scores as reported by testing services. Student Survey. Report on student scores as reported by testing services. Corputer generated smrnary of grades at end of each sanester.  IMProvllrr PIJ\\N  Target:M:JNITORING AND ASSESSMENr OF Sl'UDENT AOJIEVEMi,NT/TIME ON TASK OutOC111e:J'o .inprove student success on standardized tests and in the classrOCill. ACTIONS RESFONSIBILITY TIMELINE RESOURCES STAFF DEVEIOPMENT EVALUATIODNA TA . b. InpJ.ement special Pr1.rx:1.pal, Inplement Renaissance Inservice on CanpJter generated. recognition and Renaissance 1991-92 Program, Renaissance Program. sumnary of grades. incentive programs Team Refine each Ccmmmity for academic year adrlevarent c. Continue and expand Principal, Implemented Existing labs. Explai,atioo to teachers Canp.iter generated the rea.ding labs. Reading 1990-91, and staff of the program s1.lllll,aryo f grades. Specialists Revise and and its possibilities expand each year N 3. Iroplanent a plan to increase parental 5UHX\u0026gt;rt for academic achievement. a. Establish an Principal, Initial Renaissance Inservice on the Student achievement academic booster Renaissance Plans, 1991 Program, programs ftan the data, Student/ club. Team Pully Camunity Renaissance program. teacher surveys implemented 1991-92 b. Refine the present Principal, Examine Interim report Meetings to explain Parent survey at the program to keep Guidance existing Parent conf. precess and get input end of the year. parents informed counselors, program and Days fran teachers in regard to Camunication revise as Newsletters academic progress Coordinator necessary and results of standardized tests. N N  IMPi PLAN Taiget :IDNITORINGA NDA SSES9-IUJTO F SWDENTA OUEVEMINJ.'/TJMONE TASK Outcane:To increase student time on task. ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY TIMELINE P.ESOURCES 1. Establish a procedure to minimize outside interruptions to the classroan. a. Establish a Principal, Inplem:mt NLR 'IV regularly scheduled teachers, office Septauber Pager for tinE, procedure, st\n,.ff, guidance 1992, Refine custodians and length of counselors in May of announcements. each year b. Inplerent an Principal, Inplement Club sponsors, assanbly schedule Activities 1991-92 School which provides an Director, Cami. Refine in calendar equitable of teachers May of each distribution of tinE .for classes and minimizes the loss of class tinE. c. Establish an Administrators, Inplarent Teachers, effective policy D-Hall teacher 1991-92 D-Hall for dealing with Re-evaluate teacher tardies to minimize each the disruptions to sarester class tinE. d. Develcp a policy for Principal, Inpleuent Administrators administrators, Assistant 1991-92 Counselors office personnel, Principals, Refine Teachers and guidance to Guidance each year limit classrocm Counselors, interruptions (i.e. Office sending rressages, Personnel pulling students ait for conferences)  SI'l\\FF DEVELOFMENI' EVAUJATIODNA TA Explanaticn in preschool Teacher survey at faculty meeting. the end of the year. Written e)!j)lanation and fonns in faculty handbook. Explanation in preschool Teacher survey at faculty ~ting. the end of the year. Written explanation in faculty handbook. Explanation in preschool Survey of teachPrs faculty ~ting and and administrators procedures stated in at the end of the faculty handbook. semester. Explanation in preschool Survey of teachers facul t'\u0026lt;J r.eeting and and staff at the details in faculty end of each serrester han:.ll:xx:\u0026gt;k 'w\"  IMProvlL PLI\\N Target:l-0,JI'IORING ANil ASSESSMENr OF STUDENI' ACIJIEVEMENI'/TIME 00 'J'A.\u0026lt;\nK OUtcaoo:To increase student time on task. J\\CTIONS RESPCNSIBILITY TIMELINE RESOUR:ES 2. Inplement a plan to reduce absences fran the classroan. a. Establish a District InplE:rrent Club spcnsors, maxim.Jm number of Adrn:ini.strators, February Teachers, school business Schcol Board 1992 Parents, absences per Re-evaluate Students serester (clas~ each year related and extra- L\"'l.trricular) b. Establish a Principal, Inplanent Renaissance program to Teachers 1991-92 Program, encarrage and Crnmunity recognize good attendance. c. Establish a system Caiputer Service\nTrial run Existing for catputer- Director, Fall 1991 ccnputer assisted attendance Principal Implerent hardware, check each class 1992 Trai.ntd period. Personnel 3. Continue programs to Assistant Fall 1993 Trained encarrage tirre on Superintendent Personnel, task within the for Instruction, EY.isting classroan. Director of procedures for Secondary i.nservice Education, Principal  STAFF DEVELOPMENI' EVAIUATICN DATA Explanation in preschcol Teacher/ student faculty ireeting and survey at the end handbook. Explanation of tht year. to studk,nts at beginning of year and include in student handbook. Inservice session on C01p1ter generated Renaissance Program attendance report each grading period. Explanation in faculty C01p1ter generated ireeting. attendance report each grading period and teacher sw:vey. PET and Classroom Observation and Managerent for those evaluation by who have not attended administrators TARGET NARRATIVE SCHOOL CLIMATE A review of the perceptual and archival data available led our committee to select the following desired outcomes to facilitate the improvement of the school climate: 1. To increase student perception of the school as a safe environment. ?.. To increase the level of satisfaction teachers feel about their jobs and their work envircnment. 3. To increase student perception of school rules, policies, and disciplinary actions as fair and equitable. Using the surveys which hud been administered to students, parents, and students as our basis, we identified a discrepancy in the attitudes of students toward the-school as a safe environment and the attitudes of their teachers and parents. Teachers and parents were overwhelmingly positive in their views of the school environment as a safe place to be. On two separate questions relating to safety, teachers recorded positive responses of 72% and 89%. Only 7% and 8% of teachers responded negatively to these questions. Parents' responses were similar. On two safety questions, they replied 87% and 82% positively, with only 6% and 11% negatives. However, students registered only 65% positive in this area while 35% expressed a negative attitude toward the school as a safe environment. Only teacher data was used to target the area of teacher morale. While 80% of teachers had indicated that morale was a positive element in the school climate, this area had the lowest \"always\" rating {7%) of any question on the teachers' survey. It also had the highest negative rating with 20%. Surveys showed at least a perceptual difference in the area of fairness as related to the administration of discipline. Thirty-four percent of the teachers felt that treatment of students was always fair. Another 54% felt that it is sometimes fair for a positive rating of 88%. Par~nts generally agreed with teachers in this area with 77% responding positively to a fairness question. However, this issue did draw an 11% negative from pa.rents, the highest negative rating from this group. Students registered a high degree of dissatisfaction in responding to a question on fairness with a 41% negative response. Only 9% of students felt that discipline is always administered fairly while another 47% thought that it was sometimes. Once these outcomes wert selected on the basis of the data listed above, a subcommittee was appointed tu develop improvement plans for each outcome. The subcommittees met over several weeks, developing their plans. The plans were submitted to the chairman and the vice-chairman of the target committee for approval. Some were returned for \"-fine-tuning\" and the elimination of duplications. The final versions of these plans are attached. 24 N Ln  IMPi. PLI\\N Target: School Clilrate OUtCCIIE:To increase student perception of the school as a safe enviranrrent. 1\\CTIONf\nRE.5PrnSlBILITY TIMELINE RESOUOCES 1. Encourage the use of Administraticn AUgust NLRID police patroi.s thra.1gh 1991 carrpus before a.ud after school 2. Establish and A ccmnitt.e.-e of Septanber ProfesE\nional illplanent a roothc-d by administrators, 1991 camo.mity which tr=bled or counselors, and cw.nseling dangerous students teachers services, coold be referred for NLRSD camseling and perhaps counselors, alternative schooling local alternative school 3. Expand the use of peer Peer counseling 3rd 9 weeks Faculty and c=nseliug to enable faculty advisor 1992 student students to discuss human relations vohmteers for fears about safety camri.ttee pe.-e.r ccunseling services 4. Establish a nethod by 1\\dmi.n:i.stration Spring 1992 Human which a student may Relations identify duty Camri.ttee personnel 5. Utilize portable 1\\dmin:i.stration Spring 1992 Faculty camunication devices for duty pers01mel  STAFF DhVELill!'!ENI' EVALUATION DA'l'A Explain procedures to Sturent survey at staff in preschcol end of schcol year IllEtting Explain procedures to Study of referral staff in preschool data over a five meetings year pericd Current faculty advisor Records kept by peer to meet with and to coonselirg train volunteers Explanation of Perusal of data by identification procec,.ure admin:i.strati ve r\ntaff Dplanation involving Perusal of data by the use of camunicati.on adminir\ntrative staff devices  IMPi PIJ\\N  Target:Sch=l Climate OUtcare:To increase the level of satisfaction teachers feel about their jabs and their work envirorarent. ACTIONS P.ESPONSIBILITY TIMELINE REOOURCT.S STAFFD EVEWFMENI' EVAIUATICDNA TA 1. InplenEnt reward Teacher 5-year plan Businesses, Inionn staff of Feedback fran system for years of recognition beginning Civic criwria honorees service ccmnittt, Spring 1992 organizations, patrons 2. Provide faculty PISA and Student 1992-93 Businezses Inform staff of F'Eeedback fran luncheons once a organizations academic and patrons criteria faculty and hosts nonth school year Septanber May 3. Establish system of Teacher 1992-93 Supervioors, Inform staff of Feedback fran acknowledgeirent for recognition Spring and Principals, criteria faculty outstanding teaching ccmnittee Fall Departnent practices in the Semester Chairs, classro:m Students and peers 4. Obtain discounts from Renaissance August 1, Renaissance Infonn staff businesses Director 1991 Director  IMProvill.r PLAN  'l'arget:.School Clinate Outcx:rre:To increase student perception of school niles, policies, ana aisciplinary actions as fair and e::aj.table. 1\\CTIONS RFSK.lNSIBILI'IY TIMELINE RF.SOORCES STAFF DEVEIJJPMl:NI' EVALUATIODNA TA 1. Include a unitollll A comm.ttee of By August 1, Present and Present new Evaluation oy survey system of rules and administrators, 1992 past handbooks to faculty ar.d staff at the end of the punishnents to be teachers, parents fran and point out changes school year followed consistently ar..d students surrounding in the Student districts Hrux'lbook, with established ai:peals process ' 2. Conduct a survey to The Student By March 30, Survey Results Circulate results of Use data fran survey know exactly where Council 1992 the survey to fonrulate possible students ~ceive new proaa.-dures \"unfairness\" to exist 3. Form hmian relatims Students, August l, Students, Inform staff On-going team teachers and 1991 teachers, and a. To coordinate administrators administrators activities that praoote unity and involvarent frar, all s~ts of the student popllation b. To act as a ccmnuni-cation tool between the student body and the faculty and administration c. 'l'O serve as a sounding board for student problems d. To serve as a liaison be~n school and ccmnunity TARGET NARRATIVE PARENT-COMMUNITYIN VOLVEMENT Beginning in March of 1991, the members of the Parent-Community Involvement Committee reviewed the archival, perceptual, and achievement data for the school to identify areas in need of improvement. Committee members defined three areas that directly impact parent-comnmnity involvement and selected the following desired outcomes to facilitate the improvement: 1. To increase the involvement of the business community in the school programs, 2. To increase the involvement of parents in the school programs, and 3. To improve involvement of the non-business community in school programs. Using the surveys which were administered to students, parents, and teachers as a basis, the committee came to the conclusion that there were discrepancies in the attitudes of the students, their parents, and their teachers regarding the involvement of parents in school programs. In response to the question of parent conferences, 63% of the students said parents rarely or never attended\nhowever, parent responses showed 92% did have an opportunity to discuss student progress through some form of teacher conference. The committee members felt that increased involvement on the part o~ both the business and non-business community should be a target area since more than 60% of students surveyed stated that guest speakers were rarely invited to classes. A subcommittee was then assigned to each outcome. Each subcor.unittee conducted additional research into its outcome before considering specific actions to address the outcome. The subcommittees met over several weeks developing their plans. The plans were submitted to the chairman and the vice chairman of the target committee for approval. Some were returned for refinement and the elimination of duplications. The final versions of these plans are attached. 28 N '  :\n:MPi. PLI\\N Target:PARENI'-\u0026lt;Il'IMUNITIYN VOLVEMENT OJtcane:To Increase Involvarent of Parents in the School Programs ACTIONS RE.5PCtlSIBILITY TIMELINE IlESOOlO:S 1. Farm Academic Booster Administration Inplerent Renaissance Club sponsors Spring '91 Program 2. Increase direc,t Administration Fall 1992 Media Involvarent of parents Coonselors Continuing Newsletter with students' procJrarn Teachers Staff Ccmnuni ty Camrunications Orc,dlllZatiumi Coordinator A. Teacher camrunication with parents 1. 11 G::od News\" card 2. Telephone B. Parent Conferences/ Open House 1. weal Media/ NLRIV 2. School newsletter  STAFFD EVELOENT EVALUATIODNA TA Presentation of Participation of Acadanic Booster Club actively involved parents Distribution of carparison of information to staff participation with through school calendar previous years w 0  lMPi PIJ\\l'i Target :PARENT-a:JMMUNITilYlV OLVEMEl'lT Outc::aoo:To increase the Involvarent of the Business Camll.lility in the School Programs ACl'IONS RESPOOSIBILITY TJMELINE RESOUICES S'ffiFF DEVElOFMENJ' 1. Detenru.ne and Renaissance Inplaient Students Presentation of camrunicate the needs Carrnittee October Staff P,erurissance Program to of the school to the Principal 1992 Business Staff business ccmrunity Ongoing Camunity A. Survey students, staff, and camruni ty B. Establish goals c. Present resultD to camrunity 2. Utilize the rr~terials/ Renaissance Inplerrent Staff Crnpilation of resa.ircp_s resources fran the Ccmnittee Novanber Business available and business carmmity 1991 Camunity presentation to the Revise each Stuaents st,1.ff year 'Ihereafter 3. Establish a procedure Principal Inplarent Staff Explanation of Academic for contirruing Renaissance Spring '91 Students Booster Club to Staff business camrunity Camu.ttee Expand Business involverrent, i.e. Chamber of Invol varent Carm.mity Academic Booster Club Ccmnerce '91-92 Parents Ilcfine each year thereafter  EVAWATICN DATA Analyze data Detennine the use of resa.irces by staff Trace the involvarent of business camuni ty over 5-:year period J'   IMPROVEMENT PI! Target: PMENI'--\u0026lt;Xt-MJNITYIN VOLVEMENI'  OUtcare:_'.I'o I11prove Involvement of the Non-Busilless camunity in School Programs ACTIONS RESPONSIBILITY TIMELINE RESOURCES STAFF DEVEWPMENT EVALUATICtil DATA 1. Establish school needs Sch:Jol Inplerrent Camtunity Pre-school conferezx::es Deternu.ne nllll\\bers for ackli tional Camunications Octc:ber 1991 Students Staff receives training and effectiveness involvenent of the coordinator Evaluate Parents in parent-camrunity of volunteers used non-business ccmnunity yearly School involvement strategies during year and ways to involve Personnel camunity 2. Establish a p:iol of A ccranittee of Inplarent Parents, Teachers advised of Staff and volunteers volunteers (rrumbers to volunteers, February Grandparents services av-dilable and will evaluate be detennined parents, school 1992 .Retired procedure for obtaining effectiveness of according to requests personnel, and individuals and services during faculty program on an w for service) students other rreeting individual basis interested persons 3. Develop_ an awareness Coordinator of Inplerrent Media Special rulletins to Survey staff and of services available Volunteers Septanber District staff i.e. calendar volunteers and Principal 1992 newsletters students School newsletters School television .. TARGET NARRAT:VE HIGH EXPECTATIONS Collection-of information used in this study began two years ago in preparation for the total restructuring of the two existing North Little Rock High schools. Work continued through the fall of 1990. This committee first met in March, 1991, to review collected materials, including achievement, archival and perceptual data. The project was completed in May, 1991. Many positive factors were noted in data gathered through surveys of teachers, students and parents. Some areas of conce=n, derived from the collected data, led this committee to identify high student expectations as an area that needed enha1,cement. The following factors were noted: Increased performance-based assessment and other alternative assessments should be expanded to stay abreast of national trends. Enhanced learning could occur with the use of more classroom activities requiring thinking skills, problem solving, and cooperative learning. Student enrollment in higher level and science, could be increased by enroll and to remain in the class. would be valuable in this area. courses, especially math encouraging students to Mere parent involvement Recruitment of minorities for high level classes would improve the racial composition of classes and help reduce discrepancies between black-white test scores. Improving attendance rates of students in lower-level classes would improve the success rates of these students. The committee chose three outcomes designed to alleviate concerns and to enhance student expectations on the part of teachers, parents and students. They are as follows: To expand the Ube of classroom str~tegies designed to encourage interactions that promote critical thinking skills and problem solving abilities. To promote the use of instructional techniques and policies that convey high teacher expectations for all students. To implement programs that will aid \"at-risk\" students in mastering requirements for graduation . 32 w w .. '  IMPID PLAN  'rarget: High Expectations OUtcare: To expand the use of classrcx:m strategies designed to encoo.rage intP.ractions that prCJ10te critical thinking skills and problan solving abilities. ACTICNS RESPCNSIBILITY TlMELINE RESOURCES STAFF DE.VEWPMENI' r:vALU1\\TICND ATA 1. Provide observation Central office By May 1, School distn.ct Select master teachers Em-of-year days for teachers to and b.Jildirq 1993 and business with daronstrated departmental reports ooserve master teachers administration and university ability in teaching to include a sumary (in and out of alliances problan solving arid of what observaticns district) =itj cal thinking were ccooucted and what changes were inplarcnted in classroans as a result of the observations 2. EDphasize tests Classroan By September State Schedule inservice Gurvey at end of requiring problan- teachers 1, 1992 DE:part:rrent of sessions on alternate 92-93 to ccnpare solving and decision- Education\nforn,s of testing types of tests being making skills\ndistrict used encau-age performance iI1Structional based assessment services 3. Encourage teacher Director of By May 1, Content area Give inservice sessions Carpare teacher rnanbership in state Personnel, 1992 orgruuzations for participation in participation in and naticnal content Director of and acadanic content area 1993 with that in area organizations Secoooary alliances organizations, workshops 1992 Education, and conventions Assistant Superintendent of Instruction 4. Hold inservice Acadanic August 1992 Specialists Inservice workshcps Inflf'rvice evaluation workshops enphasizing depar1:ntnts Ongoing forms proolair-sol ving, central office Classroan observatim cooperative learning, thinking skills and alteniative assessrrent  IMPID PLAN  Target: High Expectations Outoane: To prarote the use of instructional techniques and policies that convey high teacher expectations for all students ACTIONS RESPCNSIBILITY TlliELINE RESOURCES STAFF' DEVEWPMENT EVALUATICDNA TA 1. Do away wJt.h 50% floor Central offJ.ce 1991-92 Central office Staff meeting on grades and school board 2. Encwrage training Ce:ntral office Over next Central office Training sessions Observations programs such as PET, 5 years TESA, cooperative learning, thinking skills, etc., that will err:ourage teachers to expi:ess consistently high expectations for all students 3. Administrator-parent- Glidance, Septaiber Retention data of teacher-guidance teacher, parents, 1992 students in upper-conference prior to administration, level classes and cut~ff date for students docurrentation of drq:ping upper-level conferences clas5es 4. Establish an academic Renaissance team October School Staff rrero newsletter 1991 personnel 5. Offer suggestions for Academic February Master teachers Staff Developrent days Inservice evaluation inservice programs on departments 1992 forms high expectations for students and teachers within each content area 6. Decrease enrolllrent in Guidance August 1992 Central office Camtunicaticn of action Statistical l=-level classes Administration Principal to staff, along with evaluation of so nore individual Departrrent Chairs Glidance expectations academic performance attention is possible Deparbrent of these students Chairs .. ' t'  IMProJ!llI' PLAN  Target: High Expectations Outcane: To inplenent programs that will aid \"at-risk\" students in mastering requirerrents for graduation w V, 1. 2. 3. 4. .ACTIONS Conduct a survey of students/teachers on reasons for poor attendance, dropping out or making failing grades on the pru:t of students. Prarote student participation in the follc:Ming programs as necessary --oaipensatory education -alternative school p~nt -reaclin9' program (PALS, Ll'Jl)\n.iorkstudy programs -suwart groups -incentive programs -parenting skills for students Inplement attendance alert teams Provide incentive programs within classes and/or departnents so students can be recognized for their efforts RESIOISIDILITY English classes and staff surveys CCllllSelors, special services Attendance administrator, OC11p,1ter services director Academic department Renaissance Team Department chairpersons TIMELINE RESOl.JK:ES STAFF DE.VEWPMENI' EVALUATIODNA TA 1991-92 Staff and Staff meeting SUrvey results and. students identification of tq\u0026gt; ten conoerns May 1992 Special Review conoerns for services changes September Attendance Staff meeting CCJl{'Uter generated 1993 administrator attendance report for and OC11pUter each grading period services Fall, 1991 Renaissarce Faculty rrcetings Statistics analysis program on attendance, :ill,proved grades, graduation rates  ANNUAL SCUOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (Please insert after this page) Nit  .!' r \"' REPORT to the NORTH LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF EDUCATION From the COORDINATING COMMITTEE ON DISCIPLINE MAY 1995 \\. ~ Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 Overview The Coordinating Committee on Discipline was appointed during Spring of 1994 through the Office of the Superintendent to develop recommendations relating to the broad area of discipline in the North Little Rock schools (see Committee list in Appendix A). The Coordinating Committee met from August, 1994, through May, 1995. In weekly meetings, it defined discipline, identified the areas of concern, and selected the categories for Focus Groups. More than two hundred and fifty people were involved in the Committee and Focus Group activities, contributing more than 1200 work hours of time to the project. Dr. Allan Ward of the UALR Department of Speech Communication served as Project Facilitator. The Coordinating Committee organized sixteen Focus Groups. Each Focus Group included a category of participants in the school system, including parents, teachers, students, administrators of the elementary, middle, and high schools, bus drivers, law enforcement/related personnel, alternative elementary school teachers, and alternative secondary school teachers. The Focus Groups identified needs and recommended solutions. Facilitators for the Focus Groups were Dr. Linda Pledger and Ms. Christy Standerfer of the UALR Department of Speech Communication. The Coordinating Committee reviewed the recommendations of the Focus Groups and, through a series of discussions and written drafts, prepared this final report to be presented to the Board of Education. Committee Definition of Discipline For the purposes of making recommendations to the Board of Education, this Committee uses the following definition: Discipline is the process of learning and following clearly defined guidelines for productive behavior and of identifying penalties for violations of that behavior. This process includes the acceptance of responsibility for choices and consequences, thereby demonstrating selfcontrol and respect for self and others. 2 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 Philosophy of Discipline The Committee feels it is important that all of the detailed work of writing and implementing discipline policies should be carried out in a spirit that views discipline differently from punishment. The Committee views discipline as a positive part of the process of learning, where we emphasize consequences for behavior. In this way, the process of disciplining can become a \"teaching moment,\" demonstrating how, in the future, alternative behaviors can produce more beneficial results. The positive benefits of discipline have an impact on individuals who are learning new behavioral choices and also on the learning environment which is freed from disruption and can concentrate its collective efforts on the activities related to education. There are three aspects of work with discipline that relate closely and must be constantly considered: first, written guidelines on discipline should be as specific as feasible\nsecond, flexible and reasonable application of the guidelines would be made in individual circumstances\nand third, the more frequent and extensive the communication is among all parties related to matters of discipline, the more consistent should be the individualized application of the guidelines. This philosophy of emphasizing the positive aspects of discipline can be infused into the educational system by all of us in a variety of ways in individual circumstances. 3 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 Recommendations Discipline Policies 1. Review the district-wide policy currently in force. 2. If necessary, rewrite the policy in simple, direct language. 3. Review the policy with groups of students, parents, faculty, bus drivers, and law enforcement and related personnel to be sure the policies are clear to them, and invite their suggestions in the wording of the policies. Make them all owners of the process and the result. Be specific on cause and effect relationships\nthat is, list and define a specific offense and explain as specifically as possible the range of consequences for the person who abuses this guideline. 4. When the policies are completed, have a major kick-off campaign, in which these policies are made accessible to everyone. Hold assemblies for students, discussions for parents, review sessions for faculty, etc. Be prepared to implement the policies consistently starting on a date soon after the kick-off activities. Content of Policies 1. Describe categories of offenses from mild disruptions to lifethreatening situations. Identify the nature of the specific kinds of acts that come under each category. 2. Specify the personnel responsible for handling each level of offense. 3. Be very specific about the range of consequences for each category of offense. Be prepared to enforce these consequences consistently. 4 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 Implementation of Policies 1. After the policies are revised, hold discipline training sessions for all district personnel. Encourage them to act promptly and consistently in all situations. Let them know that the goal is for all personnel to implement the policies with equal justice in all school environments. Emphasize positive aspects of maintaining a safe and orderly environment for learning. 2. Implement a plan for addressing infractions specifically and quickly. 3. Ensure that timely feedback occurs among all parties involved. Student Support 1. Develop training plans for peer facilitation: a. Increase time of peer panel sessions. b. Develop \"Buddy\" system for long-term relationships. c. Bring together students with similar concerns. 2. Offer both guidance and personal counseling services for students, adding personnel as funds become available. 3. Identify at-risk students as early as possible and provide assistance. Student Safety 1. Increase hall supervision. 2. Increase the use of metal detectors and video cameras on school property. 3. Expand number of resource officers. 4. Provide teacher training on gang-related issues. 5. Monitor the process of admitting students from other districts. 5 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 6. Follow the procedures for disciplinary referrals and evaluate them for efficiency. 7. Assure quick access and response time for all teachers in obtaining assistance. 8. Make intercoms accessible in all staff work areas. 9. Work with the NLR Police Department to do an analysis of each school building, in order to be aware of any security measures that should be implemented. 1 O. Consider adding aids or increased video monitoring on bus routes with documented behavior problems. Student Self-respect 1. Share information about successful incentive programs across the district. 2. Review incentive programs to determine effectiveness in promoting good student behavior. 3. To improve the image and perceptions about schools, disseminate regularly information about the positive things students are doing. 4. Establish a procedure for on-going discussions so students can voice their opinions and make suggestions. 5. Promote more student interaction with educators and people in the community. Law Enforcement and Related Personnel Recommendations 1. Develop a method of networking among students, parents, school officials, probation officers, juvenile justices, law enforcement officers, resource officers, OHS, and any other pertinent agencies. 2. Notify schools and teachers of the students under court jurisdiction. 6 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 3. Lobby for legislation that would have an impact on discipline, such as acts that would expand and improve the juvenile justice system, and that would add a OHS office in NLR and a probation office in NLR. 4. Provide more full-time resource officers in schools as needed. 5. Provide all school personnel with training in conflict management. 6. Incorporate into the curriculum in all grades the teaching of personal responsibility. 7. Explore ways to make parents feel welcome in schools. 8. Monitor the method of documenting and reporting discipline incidents for clarity and consistency. 9. Enforce all attendance regulations. New Teachers Guidance 1. Develop a mentoring, buddy system. 2. Create orientation on procedures and discipline. 3. Do not overload schedules of new teachers\nconsider release time for observing mentor's teaching skills\nand have new teachers observed in classroom and assisted if necessary. 4. Encourage administrators to hire as early as possible in order to have the schedule completed as soon as possible so teachers can be prepared. Coordination of Policies Between High School Campuses 1. Schedule periodic dual-campus faculty meetings to insure increased communication between staffs. 2. Review all dual-campus faculty meetings to ensure increased communication between staffs. 7 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 3. Identify as early as possible students at risk of not completing high school and provide assistance. Accou ntab i I ity 1. Offer viable alternatives for students (such as vocational training and apprenticeships). 2. Develop clearly written procedures and referral processes, including a range of acceptable options for discipline. These options will provide parents and students and educators with alternatives from which to choose, such as parenting skills training to be attended by both parents and students. These options will also enable the educator to exercise creativity in dealing with individual circumstances in unique and innovative ways. 3. Design and implement staff development programs for conflict management adapted to meet the needs of each building. 4. Develop a plan for recruiting positive role models for minority males. 5. Develop a pre-K through 12 program to teach students conflict-management skills and to build positive self concepts. Reality of Gangs 1. Provide periodic training for all administrators, teachers, support personnel, parents and community in the sociology and basics of gang-related matters 2. As soon as possible, appoint a Task Force to research, plan, implement, and evaluate a program of positive options to replace gang-related activities. The Task Force should include representatives from home, school, and community. 8 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 Positive Feedback 1. Carefully record and quickly publicize accomplishments in the area of discipline, including policy and responses to wellknown incidents. 2. The NLR newspaper should be contacted by the district's Information Coordinator for continuous positive coverage of progress made. 3. The Information Coordinator should consider the feasibility of producing an employees' newsletter and of devoting a section of current publications of the school system to provide continuous positive feedback. 4. At school assemblies, PTA meetings, faculty meetings, administrative sessions, etc., a place on the agenda should always be available for an update of the positive things being implemented. 5. In conjunction with the NLR newspaper and the schools, consider developing a periodic column and/or an insert such as Positive Results, written by rotating high school student interns, accountable to the journalism teacher and the newspaper. Listening To and Empowering Students 1. Schedule small group meetings on a regular basis so all students will have the opportunity to express themselves. At the students' request, bring in others, such as law enforcement officers, counselors, administrators, bus drivers, who can address various topics of concern to the students. Send reports from the student group meetings to the appropriate personnel. 2. Empower the students to use the procedures of working through the system, including the Principal, the Superintendent, and the Board. 9 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 Alternative Schools, Elementary 1. Rename the Alternative school, omitting the word Alternative. 2. Provide clearly-defined entry and exit guidelines, including who is involved and who makes decisions at each step. 3. Provide more on-site counseling opportunities for students. 4. Provide written information from the school staff for parents of children in alternative schooling, including legal aspects and procedures for entering. 5. Continue to provide staff development and networking with other programs and agencies. 6. During the coming year, explore alternative schools in other states for options used in disciplining students. 7. In staff development, address legal issues concerning discipline, including procedures for Family in Need of Supervision (FINS)\nprocedural due-process\ntort law\nstate codes on behavior\nIDEA\nSection 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973\nand provide yearly training in non-violent crisesprevention and intervention. Alternative Schools, Secondary 1. Provide clearly defined entry and exit guidelines, including who is involved and who makes decisions at each step. 2. Provide thorough orientation program for all new students. 3. Provide social skills curriculum supervised by trained professionals to help the students' interpersonal behavior. 4. Maintain low student-teacher ratio with paraprofessionals to aid teaching teams. 5. Include in-service training for working with behaviordisordered youth. 1 0 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 6. Continue to work with juvenile intervention programs, including Step One Early Intervention Program and the Youth Challenge Program at Camp Robinson. 7. Explore the feasibility of including a Student Assessment Class (SAC) for alternative students. 8. Consider daily use of metal detectors at Argenta and the Boys' and Girls' Club. 9. Provide teachers with training in physical crisis intervention. 10. Explore the possibility of uniforms for students, with possible corporate sponsorship to fund those in need. 11. Expand programs for students with alcohol and drug problems and for children of alcoholics. 12. Include parental responsibilities as part of the intake process, e.g. regular school visits and enrollment in parenting classes. 13. Continue to encourage progress toward site-based management and decision-making. 14. Implement in-house G.E.D. option. 15. Ensure that teachers have sufficient and current materials. 16. Consider incentive stipends for teachers in alternative schools. 17 Provide more on-site counseling opportunities for students. On-going Future Efforts The Committee suggests that the superintendent create an ongoing committee with rotating membership to review discipline concerns and make recommendations for change. 1 1 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 Facilitator's Recommendations for Using Team Focus These suggestions are made as a way to efficiently implement the next steps of the NLR work on discipline. Team Focus is an interactive computer-based program originally operated by IBM. This equipment is now at UALR and just becoming available for use. Participants meet around a U-shaped table as they might in a regular conference setting with a recessed computer station in front of each of them. A facilitator assists in the user-friendly computer generation of ideas, editing, and prioritizing, with intermittent discussion among participants. Because all participants have simultaneous input into the computergenerated group results, the Team Focus process makes maximum use of participants' time, accomplishing in a short session what might take long multiple meetings without the equipment. The Committee this year has conducted a broad needs assessment, has made many specific suggestions for implementation, and has identified areas that need further detailed work. For the next phase in the ongoing work with discipline, these recommendations are made: 1. To implement those recommendations that need no further study. 2. To let the appropriate administrative offices implement recommendations related to their respective areas. 3. Where more detailed steps to be taken are needed, to appoint several smaller committees, each with a very specific narrow area of focus. 4. To use the T earn Focus resources for each of these committees to create specific action steps and to prioritize them within a short time frame. 5. To utilize the services of UALR Team Focus facilitator Dr. Michael Hemphill, Chair of the Department of Speech Communication, to coordinate these committees' efforts using the new equipment next year. 1 2 Report to the North Little Rock Board of Education From the Coordinating Committee on Discipline May 1995 Appendix A Coordinating Committee on Discipline Members Bobby Acklin Harold Allen Rhonda Banks Bill Bowers Joyce Brewer Dana Chadwick Johnnie Collier Kathy Cook Esther Crawford Rose Dirden Christine Hickman Charles Hunter Fran Jackson Robert Johnson Louene Lipsmeyer Mable Mitchell Nancy Moore Lou Scott Sherry Smith Helen Stegal Winston Turner Bill Whitten Gayle Wing Assistant Superintendent-Desegregation Principal-Glenview Elementary Parent/East Campus PTA President Administrative Asst-Lakewood Middle School Parent Director of Secondary Education Teacher-NLRHS-West Campus Principal-Rose City Middle School Director of Elementary Education Teacher-Belwood Elementary Parent/HIPPY Program Parent/Biracial Committee Director of Student Affairs Parent/Biracial Committee CTA President/Teacher-Central Elementary Board of Education School District Psychologist D.A.R.E. Officer CTA/Teacher-Ridgeroad Middle School Parent Teacher-Lakewood Middle School Counselor-Boone Park Elementary Parent/PTA Council 1 3 PROHIBITED CONDUCT AUG 1 8 1995 Ofifc e of DesegregatioMno rntonng FBJ Appropriate learning opportunities can be afforded students only in an environment that is free from conflict, distraction, intimidation, and various other influences that result from student misbehavior. Certain student actions are beyond the definition of acceptable student behavior and are therefore prohibited in school. Prohibited conduct includes, but is not limited to the following: 1. Disregard for directions of teachers or administrators. 2. Disregard for directions of bus driver, lunch aides, or other authorized school personnel. 3. Disruption and/or interference with the normal and orderly conduct of school and school sponsored activities. 4. Behavior that involves indecent and/or immoral acts. 5. Wagering or any form of gambling. 6. Physical abuse, assault, insult or threatened physical abuse to a school employee. 7. Physical abuse, assault, insult or threatened physical abuse to another student or any other individual. 8. Possession of knife, razor, ice pick, explosive, pistol, rifle, shotgun, pellet gun, mace, tear gas, pepper spray, or any other object that can be considered a weapon or dangerous instrument. 9. Possession of alcoholic beverages or any narcotic drug as defined by Arkansas law or School Board policy\nor using, under the influence, offering for sale, selling, or buying alcoholic beverages or any narcotic drug as defined by Arkansas law or School Board policy. 10. Destruction of or the attempt to destroy school property. 11. Stealing or the attempt to steal school property or the property belonging to another individual. 12. Cheating or copying the work of another student. Page 1 of 2 PROHIBITED CONDUCT FBJ 13. Failure to abide by attendance rules. 14. Excessive tardiness to class. (Secondary use only) 15. Use of profanity, vulgar language or obscene gestures. 16. Committing extortion, coercion, blackmail or forcing another person to act through the use of force or threat of force. 17. Engaging in verbal abuses such as name calling, ethnic or racial slurs, or using derogatory statement to other students, school personnel or other individuals. 18. Hazing includes subjecting students to indignity, humiliation, intimidation, social or other ostracism, shame or disgrace. 19. Gang Related Activities include belonging to or participating in secret societies of any kind. Gangs are prohibited on school grounds and at school-sponsored activities. Clothes, jewelry, hand signs, and other symbols of gangs and gang membership are not permitted. 20. Sexual harassment. The School District reserves the right to establish rules in addition to those listed above and to punish those who are guilty of their violation. Punishment may include detention study hall, suspension, expulsion or referral to the police. Any of these disciplinary actions may occur on the first offense or any subsequent offense depending upon the nature of the situation and the age of the student involved in the situation. Act 888 of 1995 requires principals to report to the police crimes committed by students on school campuses or while under school supervision. Page 2 of 2 DISORDERLY ACTIVITIES FBM Disorderly activities on the part of any student or group of students at any time on school grounds shall not be tolerated. Participation in any such activities, no matter how well-intentioned, may bring about immediate suspension and possible expulsion from school. Disorderly activities on school grounds during school hours shall, if circumstances justify, be promptly handled by civil authorities. Page 1 of 1 DISRUPTION OF SCHOOL FBQ No student shall by use of violence, force, noise, coercion, threat, intimidation, fear, passive resistance, or any other conduct intentionally cause the substantial and material disruption or obstruction of any lawful mission, process or function of the school. Neither shall a student engage in such conduct for the purpose of causing the substantial and material disruption or obstruction of any lawful mission, process, or function of the school if such a disruption or obstruction is reasonable certain to result. Neither shall a student urge other students to engage in such conduct for the purpose of causing the substantial and material disruption or obstruction of any lawful mission, process, or function of the school if the disruption or obstruction is reasonably certain to result from his/her urging. Any student who threatens a teacher or a teacher's family shall be disciplined by the building administration. The student will not return to class until the building administration has taken appropriate action concerning the incident. A conference with the custodial parent or guardian, an administrator and the teacher, will be scheduled by a building administrator as soon as possible following the incident. Act 888 of 1995 requires principals to report to the police crimes committed by students on school campuses or while under school supervision. Page 1 of 1 DRUGS AND ALCOHOL FBO The North Little Rock School District recognizes that student alcohol and other drug use is illegal and harmful and can seriously impair capacity to learn and to function effectively in our schools Therefore, the North Little Rock School District prohibits the possession, use, distribution or sale of such substances. Further, the North Little Rock School District supports a comprehensive program approach which includes, prevention, early identification/referral, intervention, and support/after-care to prevent or disrupt the use of alcohol and other drugs. The services of a certified drug/alcohol counselor are available at no cost to District students and parents. This policy applies to any student who is on school property, who is in attendance at school or at a school-sponsored activity (including any student who has left the campus for any reason and who returns to the campus}, or whose conduct at any time or in any place interferes with or obstructs the mission or operation of the school district. It shall be a violation of policy for any student: 1. To sell, supply or give, or attempt to sell, supply, or give to any person any of the substances listed in this policy or what the student represents or believes to be any substance listed in this policy. 2. To posses, procure or purchase, to attempt to possess, procure or purchase, to be under the influence of (legal intoxication not required), or to use or consume or attempt to use or consume, the substances listed in this policy or what is represented to the student to be any of the substances listed in this policy or what the student believes to be any of the substances listed in this policy. Prohibited substances shall include, but not be limited to: alcohol or any alcoholic beverage\nmarijuana\nany narcotic drug\nany hallucinogen\nany stimulant\nany depressant\nany other controlled (illegal) substance\nany substance, legal or illegal, that alters the student's ability to act, think, or respond\nany other substance that the student represents or believes to be any substance prohibited by this policy\nor any substance manufactured to look like a substance prohibited by this policy. Any student engaging in any of the activities with any of the prohibited substances listed above shall be subject to the following penalties: A. Use or possession of any substance prohibited by this policy or what the student represents or believes to be any substance prohibited by this policy. Page 1 of 2 DRUGS AND ALCOHOL FBO 1. First violation: The student shall be suspended to the North Little Rock Boys and Girls Club for a minimum of ten (10) school days. The police may be called. Proof of professional help is required when the student returns to school, and a parental conference is required prior to readmission. 2. Second violation: The student shall be expelled for the remainder of the school year. B. Selling or buying on school property any substance prohibited by this policy or what the student represents or believes to be any substance prohibited by this policy. ( 1) The police will be summoned. (2) The student will be expelled for the remainder of the school year. Any student suspended or expelled in accordance with this policy shall be required to seek professional counseling prior to readmission to school. The student will receive full counseling through District approved professional counseling services at his/her own expense. Upon readmission, continued enrollment shall be contingent upon completion of the alcohol/drug counseling program. Failure to complete the alcohol/ drug counseling may be grounds for expulsion. Page 2 of 2 EXPULSION FBT The Board of Education may expel a student for the remainder of the school year for conduct it deems to be of such gravity as to make short-term suspension or other disciplinary action inappropriate or where it finds that the student's continued attendance at school would be disruptive to the educational program or would pose unreasonable danger to other students or staff members. (Arkansas Statute 80-1516) The Superintendent of Schools, or his designee, shall give written notice to the parent or legal guardian that he has recommended to the Board of Education that the student be expelled for the remainder of the school year. The notice shall be sent by registered or certified mail to the address shown on District records. The notice shall contain a statement of the reason(s) for the recommendation and shall reflect the date, hour, and place where the Board will hear and act upon the recommendation. The hearing shall be conducted not less than three calendar days nor more than seven calendar days following the date of the notice, except that the Superintendent and the parent or legal guardian may agree to a date not conforming to this limitation. The President of the Board or other designated Board member shall preside at the hearing. The student shall be entitled to representation by legal counsel. The hearing shall be held in open session of the Board unless the parent requests that the hearing be conducted in a meeting that is closed to the public. During the hearing, the Superintendent or designee will present evidence, including the calling of witnesses, that gave rise to the recommendation of expulsion. The student, or representative, may then present evidence, including the statement of persons with knowledge of events or circumstances relevant to the charges made by the Superintendent. Formal cross-examination will not be permitted. Questions of clarification, however, may be raised by any member of the Board, the Superintendent, or designee, or the student or his/her representative. The presiding officer shall decide in case of question about the appropriateness or relevance of any question asked by any participant. Act 567 of 1995 requires expulsion from school for a period of not less that one calendar year for possession of any firearm or other weapon prohibited upon the school campus by law. A report will be given to the North Little Rock Police Department and criminal charges may be filed following an investigation. Page 1 of 1 SAFETY REGULATIONS BICYCLES/MOTORIZED VEHICLES FCF Students in grades seven and eight are permitted to ride motorcycles to school but are not allowed to drive automobiles. Licensed students in grades nine through twelve are permitted to drive automobiles to school. In order to have the privilege of driving any motorized vehicle, the student must complete a registration form provided by the school. All vehicle drivers must obey the following rules: 1. Observe all traffic regulations required of automobile drivers. 2. Ride single on bicycles and motorcycles. Safety helmets must be worn by riders of motorcycles. 3. Park in designated places and leave the area immediately. Students should not return to their vehicles during the day for any reason unless authorized to do so by school personnel. Bicycles, motorcycles, or automobiles may not be driven (or ridden) during the school day unless student has properly signed out in the office and is departing the campus 4. Prohibited substances, items, and weapons found in a vehicle parked on a school campus will subject the driver of the vehicle to all penalties described by policies. The school cannot be responsible for stolen or damage to property\ntherefore, students are encouraged to use locks. Page 1 of 1 STUDENT DRESS AND GROOMING FBD The general climate of any school is reflected by the dress, grooming and manners of the students\ntherefore, students are expected to wear appropriate clothing and to present a neat appearance at all time. Students, with the help and approval of parents, know what is acceptable attire for school activities\nmoderation in type and style should be the basic standard. The following guidelines should be followed. 1. Grooming or dress which could cause blocked vision or restricted movement is discouraged, as well as dress styles that create or are likely to create a disruption of classroom order. No caps, hats, or sunglasses will be worn in school building(s). These items are best left at home. 2. Clothing which displays profanity, nudity or suggestive comments or clothing that is supportive of illegal chemicals, tobacco products, alcoholic beverages, drug paraphernalia, etc. will not be tolerated. 3. Clothing or shoes made of materials or of such structure that cause damage to school facilities will not be permitted. 4. During warm weather, students will be permitted to wear shorts\nhowever, the appearance of students should not be disruptive to the educational atmosphere of the school. 5. For health and safety reasons, students must wear shoes at school at all times. 6. Clothing shall be clean and appropriate for school wear. Articles of dress which are distracting or which fail to conform to reasonable rules of decency shall not be worn. If in the judgement of the administration, a student's attire is a health hazard or a distraction to the educational atmosphere of the school, the student will be asked to go home and make proper adjustments. Disciplinary action may occur if grooming or dress violations continue. Page 1 of 1 SUSPENSION FROM SCHOOL FBS The Board of Education recognizes that many alternatives are necessary to a workable system for maintaining good student conduct. Among those alternatives is student suspension. The Board views student suspension as a serious matter and believes that all other less severe measures should be tried before students are excluded from the regular school experience. The school principal is authorized to suspend a student from class attendance for disciplinary reasons for a period of time not to exceed ten school days, including the day upon which the suspension is imposed. The suspension may be off-campus or may be to the on-campus student assignment class. A student may be suspended if he/she: 1. Violates school policies, rules, or regulations. 2. If guilty of conduct which substantially interferes with the maintenance of essential school discipline. 3. Is guilty of conduct which, in the judgement of school administrators, warrants the reasonable belief that substantial disruption of school operations will likely result. 4. If guilty of incorrigible conduct, including insubordination, disorderliness, and defiant and hostile acts\ntruancy or cutting class\nfighting or other hostile behavior\ndestruction of school property\nact involving moral turpitude\nor violation of parking regulations. School officials shall determine whether the alleged misconduct, if proven, would warrant a suspension from classes, and then shall proceed as follows: 1. The student shall be advised of the exact charges against him/her. 2. If the charges are denied, the evidence shall be explained and the student given the opportunity to present his/her facts or opinions. 3. If the school official finds the student guilty of the misconduct, a suspension may be imposed. 4. If possible, prior to the suspension, the custodial parent or guardian will be notified of the reason for the suspension, its duration, and the manner in which the student may be readmitted to class. If the suspension results from an Page 1 of 2 SUSPENSION FROM SCHOOL FBS incident with a teacher and if the teacher requests a conference, the student will not be readmitted to classes until a conference with the custodial parent or guardian has been scheduled by a building administrator. Every effort will be made to schedule the conference when the teacher is available. Availability would be defined as, \"before/after school and during the teacher's preparation period.\" 5. On the day the suspension is imposed, a written notice of suspension will be mailed to the parent or guardian at the address shown on the school records of the student. 6. The parent(s) or legal guardian(s) of a student shall have the right to appeal a building level decision as outlined in the student handbook section, \"Complaints, Problem Solving, and Appeal Procedures.\" Student Assignment Classes (SAC) shall be established for on-campus suspension of secondary school students. If a student is assigned to SAC three times in a given school year, any subsequent serious misbehavior will result in that student being suspended off-campus (Boys' Club, Alternative School or home) for a maximum of ten (10) days. Chronic severe discipline problems may be grounds for recommending expulsion for the remainder of the school year. An alternative school for secondary students has been established for suspension of students who are identified as having severe discipline problems. While under suspension, students shall not be eligible to participate in, practice for, or attend any student activity whether during or after the school day. These activities include both Vespers and graduation. Absence from school due to off-campus suspension shall be treated as an unexcused absence. Page 2 of 2 WEAPONS AND DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTS FBP No student shall possess, handle, or transmit any object that can reasonably be considered a weapon: 1. On the school grounds during, before, or after school, 2. On the school grounds at any other time when the school is being used by a school group, or 3. Off the school grounds at any school bus stop, or at any school activity, function, or event. A weapon is defined as a knife, razor, ice pick, explosives, mace, pepper spray, tear gas, pistol, rifle, shotgun, pellet gun, or any other instrument or substance capable of causing bodily harm. Act 57 of 1994 prohibits any minor under the age of eighteen (18) from possessing a handgun and sets the criminal penalty for possessing a handgun on a school campus, on a school bus, or at a school bus stop. Violation of this state law is a Class D felony with no provision for a suspended or probated sentence. Students found in possession of a handgun will not be treated as a first offender. Act 567 of 1995 requires expulsion from school for a period of not less than one calendar year for possession of any firearm or other weapon prohibited upon the school campus by law. A report will be given to the North Little Rock Police Department and criminal charges may be filed following an investigation. Page 1 of 1 ABSENCES AND EXCUSES FADA The Board believes the fundamental right to attend public schools places upon students the accompanying responsibility to be regular in attendance. Regular attendance can be assumed to be essential for a student's successful progress in the instructional program. In accordance with Board policy, only the following absences shall be considered excused absences, provided that in such instances parental confirmation has been received of the reason for the absence: 1. Illness 2. The existence of a family emergency or other family situations which have received prior approval by the principal. 3. When the student is on official school business. When a student returns to school after being absent, he/she shall bring a written statement from the parents with an explanation of the reason for the absence and the date of the absence. Students who have unexcused tardies or absences shall be disciplined accordingly. No make-up work shall be allowed if the absence is unexcused. A student who accumulates six (6) unexcused absences in a course during a semester shall not receive credit for that course. Exceptions may be granted by the principal after consultation with teachers, counselors, and others who have knowledge of the circumstances. School principals will notify parents or guardians when students unexcused absences total three (3). Notification will be made by telephone (on the same day) or by mail (on the following day). Schools will notify the prosecuting attorney's office when students unexcused absences exceed six (6). The prosecuting attorney can recommend that courts impose civil penalties on parents not to exceed $500 plus court costs and other fees assessed by the court. Act 572 of 1995 amends Arkansas Code 6-18-222 related to school attendance. Except in the cases of illness or other excusable reason, students are expected to attend every day in which school is in session. The Board does not recognize \"skip days\" or other similar days when students willfully miss school. Such absences shall be unexcused, and no make-up work shall be allowed. Because a student is required to be in attendance, days of suspension to the oncampus Student AssigQment Class (SAC) and/or the suspension class at the North Page 1 of 2 ABSENCES AND EXCUSES FADA Little Rock Boys and Girls Club are not counted as days of absence. A student who is exempted from compulsory school attendance (18 years of age or older) will not be permitted to enroll in school after the 6th day of the first semester or after the 6th day of the second semester unless the principal determines that extenuating circumstances exist. Students who are absent during all or part of a school day shall not participate in any school activity on that day or night unless permission is granted through the principal's office. Arkansas Code 6-18-222 requires school districts to notify the Department of Finance and Administration whenever a student fourteen (14) years of age or older is no longer in school. The Department of Finance and Administration is authorized by state law to suspend motor vehicle operator's licenses of students under the age of eighteen ( 18) who are not enrolled in school. Act 876 of 1989 authorizes school districts to enter into cooperative agreements with law enforcement agencies to detain suspected truants during school hours. The North Little Rock Police Department will detain and question school-age children who are not in school on those days and hours that the North Little Rock Schools are in session. Secondary students who are found off school grounds without permission from the school will be transported to Argenta Alternative Education Center. Parents will be contacted for further action on the truancy. Page 2 of 2 ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS FMB In order to enroll in a school in the District, a student must be a bona fide resident and must meet age requirements. The minimum age for enrollment in public school kindergarten shall be age five on or before October 1 of the year of initial enrollment. Any student who has been enrolled in a state accredited or approved kindergarten program in another state for a period of not less than sixty days, who will become five during the school year in which he is enrolled in kindergarten and whose parents or guardians establish domicile in a public school district in the State of Arkansas may be enrolled in kindergarten upon written request of the student's parents or guardians. The minimum age for enrollment in the first grade of any public school in the state shall be age six on or before October 1 of the year of initial enrollment. Any student who has been enrolled in grade one of an accredited or state approved elementary school in another state for a period of not less than 60 days, who will become age six during the school year in which he is enrolled in grade one and whose parents or guardians are residents of Arkansas, may be enrolled in grade one upon request thereby in writing by a parent or guardian. Any six year old who has not completed an accredited kindergarten program prior to initial enrollment in a public school district shall be evaluated by the District and placed in the first grade if the evaluation results indicate that the child is ready for enrollment at the first grade level. If the evaluation results indicate that the child is not ready for enrollment at the first grade level, the child shall be enrolled in the District's kindergarten program. Each school must have a placement committee consisting of the principal, a kindergarten teacher, a first grade teacher, and the child's parents. The committee's primary task is to determine whether the student should be placed in a kindergarten or a first grade classroom. A student who has been enrolled in the first grade of an Arkansas School District or a private school, but whose parents reside in the North Little Rock School District shall not be allowed to enroll in the first grade in the District if the child's sixth birthday falls after October 1 of that year. Act 363 of 1993 amends Arkansas Code 6-18-208 as follows: (a) Prior to a child's admission to an Arkansas public school, a school district shall request the parent, guardian or the responsible person to furnish the child's social security number and shall inform the parent, guardian, or other Page 1 of 2 ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS FAAB - responsible person that, in the alternative, they may request that the school district assign the child a nine (9) digit number designated by the Department of Education. (b) Prior to a child's admission to an Arkansas public school, the parent, guardian, or responsible person shall provide the school district with one ( 1) of the following documents indicating the child's age: ( 1) A birth certificate\n(2) A statement by the local registrar or a county recorder certifying the child's date of birth\n(3) An attested baptism certificate\n( 4) A passport\n(5) An affidavit of the date and place of birt\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eNorth Little Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_989","title":"Elementary School, Parent-Student Handbook","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":["North Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1989/1990"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","School management and organization","School discipline","Student activities","Students","Parents"],"dcterms_title":["Elementary School, Parent-Student Handbook"],"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/989"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["handbooks"],"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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\n1989-1990 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARENT-STUDENT HANDBOOK NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NORTH LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Parent-Student Statement of Responsibility Student Name Date The statement below must be signed and returned to the homeroom teacher within one (1) week after the student receives the handbook. We have read the North Little Rock Parent-Student Handbook. We understand the District's discipline policies and realize that the student must adhere to these and to the other policies, rules and procedures contained in the Handbook. In the event that we are not entirely certain of some aspect of school policy, we will contact the principal for clarification. Student Signature Parent/Guardian Signature Date State law (80-1629.6-80-1629.8) requires documentation of student and parent receipt of student discipline policies. This document will become part of the student's file. (over) Emergency Procedure Information Date ____ Student's Name _______________ _ Date of Birth -----------------~----- Address ______________ Home Phone ____ _ In case of emergency, illness or accident to the student named above, the school is authorized to proceed as indicated. Number below in order of desired action. __ Contact parent at number listed above. __ Contact iather at Business Name Phone __ Contact mother at ___________________ _ Business Name Phone __ Contact other ____________________ _ Name Phone Physician's Name _______________ Phone ____ _ Hospital Preference ____________________ _ Signature of Parents or Guardians: Mother's Signature Father's Signature Student's Signature It is very important that this be returned to the school office as soon ~ possible. ELEMENTARY PARENT-STUDENT HANDBOOK NORTH LITILE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT James R. Smith Superintendent 1989-1990 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 2700 POPLAR STREET Dear Students and Parents, The North Little Rock School District is recognized as a quality educational institution. Sound academic programs, great variety of offerings, special programs to meet student needs and strong school spirit have led to educational excellence in our schools. Excellence has been maintained through the outstanding support and cooperation of the students and patrons of our school district. I thank you for that support and cooperation and look forward to a continued good working relationship. This handbook has been provided so that you will better understand the purposes, policies, and regulations of the North Little Rock School District. It is important that you familiarize yourself with the total contents and that the handbook be retained for reference from time to time. If you have questions regarding information included in the handbook or any other matter, please contact the principal's office. We welcome suggestions that will help make the North Little Rock Schools even better. I hope that this school year is a happy and productive one for you. Sincerely, ~~~ James Smith Superintendent of Schools bja P.O. BOX 687, NORTH LITTLE ROCK, AR 72115/0687 501 /758-1760 ASSURANCE OF COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS RESPONSIBILITIES The undersigned superintendent for the North Little Rock School District in Pulaski County, assures the Director, General Division, Arkdnsas Department of Education, that all Schools within the District are in complidnce with the following Civil Rights Regulations as stated: ********* Title VI, Section 601, of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. Title IX, Section 901, of the Education Amendment of 1972 No person in the United Stdtes shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 No otherwise qualified handicdpped individual in the United States ... shall, solely by reason of handicap, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefit of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. This is to certify that the District's Civil Rights Coordinator is: Name: Bobby Acklin Telephone: Address: 2700 Poplar Street (P. 0. Box 687) North Little Rock, AR 72115 758-1760 ~,l) Sj,gnature r{ kkd of Superintendent Date 1 COMPLAINTS AND PROBLEM SOLVING A good communication link between the school and the home is necessary if students are to receive the maximum benefits from the educational opportunities available to them in the schools of North Little Rock. Good communication results from open, frequent and objective dialogue among students, teachers, parents and school administrators. Most school problems are the result of poor communication among the parties involved. Proper communication, therefore, usually solves most, if not all, problems that are related to the school. In order to ensure that problems are discussed and solved as quickly and fairly as possible, the following procedure is to be employed in the North Little Rock School District. If a parent becomes concerned about a problem at the classroom level, the parent should make an appointment with the teacher and thoroughly discuss the matter. Most problems are solved at this level. Should the problem not be solved through discussions with the teacher, or if the problem is not related to classroom activities, the parent should contact the principal for further attempts to find a workable solution. If the parent is not satisfied with solutions offered at the building level, the matter may be appealed to the appropriate educational director or assistant superintendent at the District Administrative Office. The phone number is 758-1700. After other appeals have been exhausted, the parent may appeal to the Superintendent of Schools. The Superintendent may uphold, overturn or modify decisions made by other District administrators. An appeal of a decision by the Superintendent may be heard only by the School Board while an official meeting of the Board is being held. North Little Rock School District 1989-90 Calendar s M I w I E s s M I w I E s August January 1 2 3 4 5 H 2 3 4, 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Au1, 18, 22, 23, 2 7 8 9 10 11.121 13 13 14 15 16 17 SD 19 staff development 14 W (16 17 18 19 20 20 W SD SO SD W 26 Au. 21, 25, teacher work day 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 27 (28 29 30 31 Au, 28, first school day 28 29 30 31 September Sept. , Labor Day February 1 2 1 2 3 3 H 5 6 7 8 9 Oct. 12-13, IIEA Met tings 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Nov. 6-10, dismiss early for parent conferences 18 so 20 21 22 23 24 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Nov. 23, Thank.s1ivin1 Day 25 26 27 28 October Dec. 21-Jan l March 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Winter Holidays 1 2 3 8 9 10 11 H H 14 Jan. l, New Year's Day 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 11 12 13 14 15 16) 17 22 23 24 25 26 27] 28 Jan. 15, teacher work day 18 [19 20 21 22 23 24 29 [30 31 Feb. 19, staff development 25 28 27 28 29 30 31 (no school) November March 26-30, dismiss early April 1 2 3 4 for parent conferences 1 SBSB SB SB SB 7 5 e 7 8 9 10 11 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 April 2-6, Spring Break 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 19 20 21 22 H H 25 April 15, Easter 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 26 27 28 29 30 May 28, Memorial Day 29 30 December June 1, Teacher work day May 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 17 18 19 20 H H 23 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 24 H H H H H 30 27 H 29 30 31] 31 June KEY w 2 w Teacher Workday, Student Holiday 3 4* s s r a 9 SD Staff Development Day, Student Holiday 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 H Holiday for Students and Staff 17, 18 19 20 21 22 23 [ Begin Nine Weeks Period 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ] End Nine Weeks Period SB Spring Break *Days to be used as make-up days in case of inclement weather Table of Contents Absences and Excuses ............. . Academic Skills Development Plan Conferences Arrival/Departure Time ............ . Arkansas School Laws Governing School Attendance .    North Little Rock School Board Policy Pertaining to School Attendance Behavior at School Activities Bus Conduct . , ..... . Care of School Property .. Change of Address ..... Communicable Disease Conduct To and From School . . .. Contact With Students While at School Corporal Punishment ......... . Demonstrations and Disorderly Activities Detention ............ . Discipline for Handicapped Students Drugs and Alcohol ....... . Electronic Communication Devices Emergency Phone Numbers Entrance Requirements .. Expulsion ....... . Field Trips ...... . Gifted/Talented Education Guidance Services. Handguns ....... , Health Services .... . Homebound Services   Homework/Independent Study Skills Injuries/Illnesses at School Leaving School During School Day Lost and Found ... Magnet Schools ....... How to Apply for Magnet School Enrollment M - to - M Transfers  . . . .    How to Apply for M - to - M Transfer Make Up Work .... , .. , . ,  Medication ....... Notes from Parents Regarding Absences Parent-Teacher Association Physical Education Promotion/Retention .. Public Display of Affection Religion in Schools .. Reporting Student Progress  Safety Regulations--Bicycles/Motorcycles/Other Vehicles Schedules ....... School Breakfast .. School Closing In Inclement Weather School Lunch .... School Supplies ..... Search, Seizure and Interrogation Seasonal Parties .... Special Education .... Student Assignments . . .     Student Behavior--Prohibited Conduct Student Dress and Grooming Student Insurance. Student Records  Student Suspension Tardies Telephones Testing Program . Textbooks . Tobacco and Tobacco Products Transfers . Visitors Weapons and Dangerous Instruments Yearbook 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 15 16 16 16 17 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 Absences and Excuses The Board believes the fundamental right to attend public schools places upon students the accompanying responsibility to be regular in attendance. Regular attendance can be assumed to be essential for a student's successful progress in the instructional program. In accordance with Board policy, only the following absences shall be considered excused absences, provided that in such instance parental confirmation has been received of the reason for the absence: 1. Illness 2. The existence of a family emergency or other family situations which have received prior approval by the principal 3. When the student is on official school business. When a student returns to school after being absent, he/ she shall bring a written statement from the parents with an explanation of the reason for the absence and the date of the absence. Students having unexcused tardies or absences shall be disciplined accordingly. No make up work shall be allowed if the absence is unexcused. Except in the cases of illness or other excusable reason, students are expected to attend every day in which school is in session. The Board does not recognize \"skip days\" or other similar days when students willfully miss school. Such absences shall be unexcused and no make up work shall be allowed. An elementarys tudenti s not permittedm ore than twenty-four( 24) absencesd uring the school year including excused and unexcused absences. Exceptions will be granted only by the principala fter consultationw ith teacher,g uidancec onsultanta nd othersw ho have knowledgeo f the circumstancesI.f a studente xceedst wenty-four( 24) absencesd uring a school year, and no exception is granted, then the student may be retained in that grade for the next school year. Excessive absences or patterns of absences may result in court action being taken against the parent. Academic Skills Development Plan Conferences Act 474 of the Arkansas General Assembly requires conferences to be organized and held by the public schools with the parents, guardians or persons in loco parentis of students in grades three, six and eight who failed to master the state's minimum performance test. The school district shall evaluate students and develop academic skills development plans to assist students in achieving mastery of the basic skills in subject areas where performance is below mastery. The conferences will be held by the end of October each school year to review the academic skills development plans. Arrival/Departure Time Ideally, students should not arrive at school more than 10 minutes before school opens (or before bus departure time) except to participate in scheduled activities. The District recognizes that this ideal cannot always be realized oo--,auseo f family schedules\nhowever, because children must have the security of supervision, absolute limits must exist as to when the school will assume responsibility. The North Little Rock School District assumes this responsibility up to 30 minutes before school hours for students who do not ride a bus to another school and up to 15 minutes for those who do. Students should vacate the school grounds immediately after school. Bus students should vacate the grounds immediately upon arrival at the home base school. Parents must make other arrangements outside these limitations. Arkansas School Laws Governing School Attendance Arkansas school laws pertaining to school attendance are found in the following acts: (Act 60-1983 and Act 1069-1985) SECTION 1. The public schools of any school district in this State shall be open and free through completion of the secondary program to all persons between the ages of five (5) and twenty-one (21) years whose parents or legal guardians are domiciled in the district and to all persons between those ages who have been legally transferred to the district for education purposes. Any person eighteen (18) years of age or older may establish a domicile separate and apart from his or her parents or guardians for school. attendance purposes. SECTION 2. The minimum age for enrollment in public school kindergarten shall be age five (5) on or before October l of the year of initial enrollment. Provided, any student who has been enrolled in a kindergarten program in another state for a period of not less than sixty (60) days, who will become five (5) during the school year in which he is enrolled in kindergarten and whose parents or guardians establish domicile in a public school district in the State of Arkansas may be enrolled in kindergarten upon the written request of the student's parent or guardian. SECTION 3. (a) Every parent, guardian or other person residing within the State of Arkansas having custody or charge of any child or children of age seven (7) through sixteen (16), both inclusive, shall send such child or children to a public, private or parochial school under such penalty for noncompliance as shall be set by law. Provided, however, this Section shall not be applicable to any child who has received a high school diploma or its equivalent as determined by the State Board of Education. (b) The State Board of Education shall adopt rules and regulations for the implementation of this Act, which shall provide that any parent or guardian of a child aged five (5) on or before October l of any school year shall have the option not to enroll such child in kindergarten in that year. Any six year old child who has not completed a kindergarten program prior to initial enrollment in a public school district shall be evaluated by the district and placed in the first grade if the evaluation results indicate that the child is ready for enrollment at the first grade level. If the evaluation results indicate that the child is not ready for enrollment at the first grade level, the child shall be enrolled in the district's kindergarten program. (Act 60-1983) SECTION 4. The Board of Directors of each school district in the State shall adopt student attendance policies. Each school district shall, as a part of its six-year educational plan, develop strategies for promoting maximum student attendance, including, but not limited to, the use of alternative classrooms and in-school suspensions in lieu of suspension from school. A student attendance policy may include excessive unexcused absences as a mandatory basis for denial of promotion or graduation. (Act 1069-1985) 2 North Little Rock School Board Policy Pertaining to School Attendance Every child who resides within the North Little Rock School District who is at least seven (7) years of age and not more than seventeen (17) years of age, and who is not legally exempt from this requirement, shall attend public school in the District or in some other public school district to which the student may legally be transferred. The following are exempt from the compulsory attendance law: 1. One who attends a_ recognized private, parochial or home school, 2. One who, because of a physical or mental handicapping condition, attends a special school, 3. One who has been suspended or expelled in accordance with the requirements of law, and 4. One who has graduated from high school. Truancy is the unlawful absence from school. Arkansas law holds parents or guardians legally responsible for insuring that children who are subject to the compulsory attendance law do attend school on a regular basis. The Board expects school administrators to seek strict enforcement of laws relating to school attendance. Principals shall see that charges are filed against parents or guardians when attendance laws are broken. Prior to the filing of charges, parents shall be warned in writing that such charges will be filed if their child's attendance does not comport with the law. Behavior at School Activities Students attending school sponsored activities, on-campus or off-campus, shall be governed by school district rules and regulations and will be subject to the authority of school district personnel. Failure to obey rules and regulations and/or failure to obey reasonable instructions of school personnel may result in loss of eligibility to attend school sponsored events. Failure to comply with District rules and regulations may also result in disciplinary action applicable under the regular school program. Bus Conduct Since the school bus is an extension of the classroom, students shall be required to conduct themselves on the bus in a manner consistent with established standards for classroom behavior. When a student does not conduct himself /herself properly on a bus, such instances shall be brought to the attention of the building principal by the bus driver. The building principal shall inform the parents immediately of the misconduct and seek their cooperation in controlling the student's behavior. The principal shall discipline guilty students as deemed appropriate. A student who becomes a serious disciplinary problem on the school bus may have transportation privileges suspended or terminated. In such cases, the parents of the students involved shall become responsible for seeing that their children get to and from school. Care of School Property Deliberate destruction or damage to school property will result in payment for loss, as well as other disciplinary action which may include police involvement. Careless destruction or damage may result in a requirement to pay damages. 3 Change of Address It is the parent's responsibility to keep addresses current in the school office. Communicable Disease The Board of Directors hereby authorizes the Superintendent to make determinations on the exclusion of a student/individual suffering from a reportable disease, as defined by the Arkansas Department of Health, on a temporary basis not to exceed ten (10) school days. ,!'\\n exclusion longer than ten (10) days shall be brought before the Board of Directors immediately for a determination on the individual's status. Before any official action is taken by the Board for an exclusion longer then ten (10) days, the individual shall be provided an opportunity for a hearing before the Board of Directors upon appropriate notice. Students/individuals excluded for reason of infectious/ communicable disease shall be readmitted by one or more of the following methods as determined by the State Department of Health: 1. By permit for readmission issued by the State Department of Health. 2. After a period of time corresponding to the duration of the communicability of the disease .as established by the State Department of Health. 3. By application to the School Health Advisory Committee and upon the recommendation of the School Health Advisory Committee. Conduct To and From School School officials may take disciplinary action against any student who does not exhibit proper personal conduct while traveling to and from school. Walkers must cross street only at crosswalks and must obey the crossing guard. Students should walk facing oncoming traffic. Contact With Students While at School In case of question about the legal custody of a student, the principal shall require the necessary documentation in order to make a valid determination of who has custody and what, if any, limitations are imposed. In cases of estrangement where legal custody has been afforded a parent, or where other legal restrictions have been decided, it shall be the responsibility of the custodial parent to make such information known to the princi-pal. Estranged parents may visit with students during school hours with consent of the parent holding legal custody. Without such consent, visits shall be in the presence of the principal. If the police, SCAN, or family service agencies wish to contact students for the purpose of obtaining information, the principal shall cooperate. If removal from school is requested, the principal shall inform the parent or legal guardian prior to any release of custody of the student. If the principal is presented a subpoena by a police officer, he/she must release the student with or without communication with the parent or legal guardian. 4 Corporal Punishment Reasonable corporal punishment may be used as a means of preserving an effective learning environment. When used, corporal punishment shall be moderate and shall be used solely for the purpose of changing student behavior. Corporal punishment shall be administered in the District in accordance with the following guidelines: l. Students shall not be paddled in the presence of other students. 2. Paddling may be done by a building administrator. At least one other certified staff member must be present when corporal punishment is administered. All paddling must be administered in the administrative offices. 3. The student shall be informed of the offense and be afforded an opportunity to explain his/her actions before corporal punishment is administered. 4. The District shall respect the wishes of parents who formally notify the school that they do not want their child disciplined by paddling. Other discipline measures, including suspension, may be employed if parents do not want corporal punishment used. 5. If used, paddling will be administered to the buttocks only. 6. A written record of the date, nature and reasons for the corporal punishment shall be made and retained by the principal. Demonstrations and Disorderly Activities Demonstrations and disorderly activities on the part of any student or group of students at any time on school grounds shall not be tolerated. Participation in any such demonstration activities, no matter how well-intentioned, may bring about immediate suspension and possible expulsion from school. Demonstration and disorderly activities on school grounds during school hours shall, if circumstances justify, be promptly handled by civil authorities. Detention Elementary and secondary school principals may establish student detention (D Halls) as a means of discipline to preserve an effective learning environment. Detention may be used before and/ or after regular school hours. Parents shall be notified in advance that early/late detention has been assigned and shall assume responsibility for student transportation. Discipline for Handicapped Students Handicapped students who engage in misbehavior are subject to normal school disciplinary rules and procedures so long as treatment does not abridge the right to a free, appropriate public education. Drugs and Alcohol This policy applies to any student who is on school property, who is in attendance at school or at a school-sponsored activity (including any student who has left the campus for any reason and who returns to the campus), or whose conduct at any time or in any place interferes with or obstructs the mission or operation of the school district. 5 It shall be a violation of policy for any student: 1. . To sell, supply, or give, or attempt to sell, supply, or give to any person any of the substances listed in this policy or what the student represents or believes to be any substance listed in this policy. 2. To possess, procure or purchase, to attempt to possess, procure or purchase, to be under the influence of (legal intoxication not required), or to use or consume or attempt to use or consume, the substances listed in this policy or what is represented to the student to be any of the substances listed in this policy or what the student believes to be any of the substances listed in this policy. Prohibited substances shall include, but not be limited to: alcohol or any alcoholic beverage\nmarijuana\nany narcotic drug\nany hallucinogen\nany stimulant\nany depressant\nany other controlled (illegal) substance\nany substance, legal or illegal, that alters the student's ability to act, think, or respond\nany other substance that the student represents or believes to be any substance prohibited by this policy\nor any substance manufactured to look like a substance prohibited by this policy. Any student engaging in any of the activities with any of the prohibited substances listed above shall be subject to the following penalties: A. Use or possession of any substance prohibited by this policy or what the student represents or believes to be any substance prohibited by this policy. (1) First violation: The student shall be suspended off-campus for ten school days\npolice may be called\nproof of professional help is required\nand parental conference is required prior to readmission. (2) Second violation: the student shall be expelled for the remainder of the school year. B. Selling any substance prohibited by this policy or what the student represents or believes to be any substance prohibited by this policy. (1) The police will be summoned. (2) The student will be expelled for the remainder of the school year. Any student suspended or expelled in accordance with this policy shall be required to seek professional counseling prior to readmission to school. The student will receive full counseling through District approved professional counseling services at his/her own expense. Upon readmission, continued enrollment shall be contingent upon completion of the alcohol/drug counseling program. Failure to complete the alcohol/drug counseling may be grounds for expulsion. Electronic Communication Devices The North Little Rock School District will enforce Act 146 of 1989, which prohibits elementary and secondary students from possessing paging devices or electronic communication devices on school campuses. Emergency Phone Numbers Emergency phone numbers where parents can be contacted are to be provided for each student enrolled in the school. It is the parent's responsibility to keep these numbers current and up-to-date. Entrance Requirements In order to enroll in a school in the District, a student must be a bona fide resident and must meet age requirements. The minimum age for enrollment in public school kindergarten shall be age five on or before October 1 of the year of initial enrollment. Any student who has been enrolled in a state accredited or approved kindergarten program in another state for a period of not less than (i() days, who will become five during the school year in which he is enrolled 6 in kindergarten and whose parents or guardians establish domicile in a public school district in the State of Arkansas may be enrolled in kindergarten upon written request of the student's parents or guardians. The minimum age for enrollment in the first grade of any publi~ school in the state shall be age six on or before October l of the year of initial enrollment. Any student who has been enrolled in grade one of an accredited or state approved elementary school in another state for a period of not less than 60 days, who will become age six during the school year in which he is enrolled in grade one and whose parents or guardians are residents of Arkansas, may be enrolled in grade one upon request thereby in writing by a parent or guardian. Any six year old who has not completed an accredited kindergarten program prior to initial enrollment in a public school district shall be evaluated by the District and placed in the first grade if the evaluation results indicate that the child is ready for enrollment at the first grade level. If the evaluation results indicate that the child is not ready for enrollment at the first grade level, the child shall be enrolled in the District's kindergarten program. Each school must have a placement committee consisting of the principal, a kindergarten teacher, a first grade teacher and the child's parent/s. The committee's primary task is to determine whether the student should be placed in a kindergarten or a first grade classroom. A student who has been enrolled in a first grade of an Arkansas School District or a private school but whose parents reside in the North Little Rock School District shall not be allowed to enroll in the first grade in the District if the child's sixth birthday falls after October l of that year. A student entering a school in the District for the first time shall submit a copy of his/her birth certificate. Official enrollment shall not be completed until this requirement is met. When a student moves into the District from attendance in an accredited school, he/she shall be placed in the same grade that would have been assigned in the former school. Students who have attended an unaccredited school shall be evaluated by the District and proper grade placement determined. Arkansas law requires that all students be immunized against poliomyelitis, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough) and red (Rubeola) measles. Students who do not comply with this requirement shall be excluded from school enrollment. A student entering a school in the District for the first time shall submit a copy of his/her immunization record. Expulsion The Board of Education is authorized to expel a student for the remainder of the school term: 1) for conduct that is deemed to be of such gravity as to make a relatively short temporary suspension inappropriate, 2) when the Board finds that the student's continued attendance at school would be unacceptably disruptive to the educational program, or 3) when continued attendance would present unreasonable danger to other students and faculty members. Arkansas Statute 80-1516 provides that directors of a school aistrict may exclude students for immorality, refractory conduct, insubordination, infectious disease, habitual uncleanliness or other conduct that would tend to impair the discipline of the school or harm the other students. Field Trips A field trip is defined as any organized educational experience outside the classroom involving travel. Written parental consent must be obtained for each field trip. 7 Gifted/Talented Education A program of gifted/talented education is provided for those students who require differentiated activities and services beyond those normally provided in the regular school program. Students who are above average in ability, task commitment and creativity may be considered for the program. Students must exemplify an interaction of these three traits. Referral for consideration to receive services through the gifted/talented program may be made to the principal by school personnel, parents, peers or the student. The decision for placement is made after all available data are reviewed by a referral/ph1r.ement committee. Guidance Services The North Little Rock School District maintains a guidance program in its elementary and secondary schools consistent with state and North Central Association regulations. The program provides counseling for students, parents and school personnel relative to students' academic progress, behavior and personal matters. Parents and students are encouraged to seek guidance services at any time. Handguns The North Little Rock School District will enforce Act 649 of 1989, which prohibits minors from possessing or carrying handguns. In Section I, a handgun is defined as, \"a firearm capable of firing rimfire ammunition or centerfire ammunition, which is designed or constructed to be fired with one hand:' Health Services Health services by the school nurse are primarily inspectional rather than diagnostic in nature. Students are routinely screened for hypertension in the 10th grade. Screening for vision and hearing is conducted for new students and is available for others at teacher and/ or parent request. Students receiving special education services may be screened more often depending upon the date of their last comprehensive evaluation. Secondary students participating in interschool competitive athletics, including Special Olympics, are required to pass a physical examination each year BEFORE being allowed to take part in such sports. Free physical examinations are provided at the beginning of the season for all students participating in such sports. Examinations conducted by family medical doctors at parents' expense will also be accepted. Homebound Services Students with medical conditions certified by a medical doctor which will require them to be absent from school for four or more consecutive weeks are eligible for homebound services. Application forms need to bf' completed as far in advance as possible and are available from Special Services. (771-6123) Homework/Independent Study Skills Recognizing that homework is a flexible and individual instructional responsibility, teachers in the North Little Rock Schools shall consider the following in making this type of assignment: That parent-student understanding of the necessity for homework is desirable. That homework shall be within the limits of individual student ability. That, within the limits of good judgment, homework should vary gradually from fairly light (no more than 15-30 minutes per day) in grades 1-3 to fairly heavy (no more than 60-120 minutes per day) in grades 10-12. 8 That teachers, particularly at the secondary level, shall, at all times, be aware of the student's problem of multiple assignments. That homework, to be purposeful and worthwhile, should, in all probability, vary from day to day depending upon the needs of the students. That the availability of study materials such as reference books at home be considered in assigning homework. The following guidelines for homework and the development of students' in - dependent study skills will be observed in making homework assignments: Assignments will be considered as an extension of the classroom instruction for the purpose of either independent skill practice for mastery or for review of previously mastered skills/ concepts. Assignments will not involve skills/ concepts which have not been previously taught. Assignments to achieve mastery of new skills/ concepts will follow guided practice to ensure that the learner can successfully practice the skills/ concepts accurately. Maximum use of classroom time for input and supervised study should be planned for each lesson. Some homework assignments can best be accomplished during supervised study conducted as part of the allotted instructional period. Assignments will be designed to provide short, frequent practice sessions focused on small segments of learning while maintaining maximum meaning for the learner. Assignments will be made which address common needs of groups of learners and specific needs of individuals rather than automatically assigning common homework to all learners without regard to the individual learner's need. Immediate feedback should be given to the learner whenever possible. Injuries/Illnesses at School When a student is injured in the school building or on the school grounds, the parent will be called immediately. The student may be taken to the family doctor if parents have rr.~de emergency numbers and the name of the family doctor available. When a student becomes ill at school, the parent is called immediately. The student will remain in the health room until the parent can check the student out of school. If contact with the parent cannot be made, the principal and teacher will do what is expedient and safe for the injured and/or seriously ill student, which may include taking/ sending the student to the emergency room of a hospital. The school assumes no responsibility for treatment. Leaving School During School Day If at any time during the school day it becomes necessary for a student to leave school, the student must report to the office to obtain permission from both a parent or guardian and a school official. The check-out sheet must be signed by the parent/guardian/ parent designee or a school official. Parent designee must be documented by a written statement from parent/ guardian. Any student arriving at school after the tardy bell or returning after an absence during a part of the school day must report to the office to get permission to return to class. Only those students who Jive within walking distance (five blocks) and have written parental consent may be granted permission to go home for lunch. 9 Lost and Found Students are encou_raged to label all belongings. Lost and found items will be kept in a designated area. Unclaimed items will be discarded periodically. Magnet Schools Six magnet schools located in Little Rock are available for North Little Rock students. Each offers one or two areas of specialization for students of all ability levels. Magnet schools offer highly-trained staff members and enriched learning activities. Optional enrollment is open to all students, kindergarten through grade twelve. Registration is on a first-come/first-served basis. Once enrolled, a student has priority to continue attending the magnet school, until he or she chooses to transfer to another magnet school or back to the assigned school in North Little Rock. The Arkansas Department of Education provides transportation to and from school for students who attend magnet schools. Pick-up points will be announced at a later date. How to Apply for Magnet School Enrollment Fill out one application for each child. Place in a stamped envelope and mail to: Magnet School Office, North Little Rock School District, P.O. Box 687, North Little Rock, AR 72115. Applications may be obtained by calling 758-1760. Applications are accepted on a first-come/first-served basis according to priorities set by the court. If the target enrollment for a school has been reached, students are placed on a waiting list. Parents receive notification of their child's acceptance by mail. Interested students and parents must return a completed application form to the North Little Rock School District by May 1. M-to-M Transfers The plan approved by the U.S. District Court allows for majority-to-minority (Mto- M) transfers among the three Pulaski County districts (North Little Rock, Little Rock and Pulaski County School Districts.) A student who is enrolled in a district in which his or her race is predominant may enroll in any district and school in the county in which his or her race is in the minority, provided that school offers appropriate programs for the student's needs at his or her grade level. Therefore, any white student in the North Little Rock School District (which is predominantly white) may elect to attend any school in the Little Rock School District (which is predominantly black.) The Arkansas Department of Education will provide transportation from predetermined pickup points for students who participate in the Mto- M transfer plan. 10 How to Apply for M-to-M Transfer Fill out one application for each child. Place in a stamped envelope and mail to: M-to-M Tran~fer Office, North Little Rock School District, P.O. Box 687, North Little Rock. AR 72115. Applications may be obtained by calling 758-1760. Appncations are accepted on a first-come/first-served basis according to priorities set by the court. If the target enrollment for a school has been reached, students are placed on a waiting list. Parents receive notification of their child's acceptance by mail. Interested students and parents must return a completed application form to the North Little Rock School District by May 1. Make Up Work A student who misses school due to an \"excused absence\" shall be afforded the opportunity to submit make up work. Following the absence, the teacher and student shall make arrangements for completion of the assignments. In order to receive credit, all work must be completed within the prescribed time. A student who misses school due to an \"unexcused absence\" shall not be afforded an opportunity to submit make up work for credit. Medication Written parent consent is required for the school to administer any medication. A medication consent form should be completed, even for medication given on a temporary basis. Prescription and non-prescription drugs must be brought to the school office in the original container stating the dosage and method of administration. Reasons for the medication must be clearly stated. All medication, including non-prescription drugs, will be kept in the principal's office and will be administered by designated school personnel. Students are encouraged not to possess any non-prescription drugs. (Possession of illegal drugs is addressed in the School Board Policy on Drugs and Alcohol FBO.) Notes from Parents Regarding Absences To be readmitted to school, a student shall bring a note from a parent or legal guardian stating the reason for the absence and the dates of the absence. Notes will be presented to the appropriate staff member. If a note is not received on the day of the return, the student will be readmitted to class with an unexcused absence. Parent-Teacher Association Parents are encouraged to join and participate in Parent-Teacher Association activities. Elementary Parent-Teacher Association meetings are usually held on the second Thursday of each month. 11 Physical Education Each elementary student shall be required to participate in physical education activities unless a doctor's statement is on file in the principal's office recommending that the student be excused from this activity. Any student who has religious objections to certain activities in the physical education program will be allowed to substitute other activities. Religious objections must have supportive documentation. Upon written request from the parents, a student may be excused from physical education activities on a temporary basis due to illness or injury. Promotion/Retention Generally, students will progress according to their chronological ages. Retention must be substantiated by a student's records. The principal and teachers will confer with the parents regarding student retention. Public Display of Affection Public display of affection is considered inappropriate behavior. Failure to abide by this rule may result in disciplinary action. Religion in Schools The Board respects the sincere religious beliefs of all students and staff members. The Board believes that teaching about religion, as it relates to a study of the historical development of civilization is appropriate. Moreover, it is proper for teachers to enumerate and emphasize the generally accepted moral and ethical principles of the different religions. Teachers shall not, however, evaluate, advocate or place values upon any particular religion or religious belief. No student shall be required to participate in programs or activities which are contrary to the tenets of his/her religion. Speakers who are affiliated with religious organizations shall be allowed to speak in schools only upon the approval of the Superintendent of Schools. The Superintendent's decision shouid be guided by the following considerations: The presentation is designed for all students who might attend the assembly or meeting. The presentation does not advocate the beliefs of any denomination, religious group or faith. The presentation does not encourage students to attend worship services or activities associated with specific denominations or beliefs. Reporting Student Progress Report cards are issued to students at the end of each nine week grading period. Written interim reports will be sent home to parents if a student's performance is unsatisfactory. Grades issued in subject areas are O-Outstanding (95-100% ), M-Mastery (85-94%), S-Satisfactory (80-840Jo) and U-Unsatisfactory (below 80%). Grades shall be based on many factors such as: tests, class assignments, class participation and special projects and contributions. Students are also graded on behavior, work habits and social growth. 12 Formal parent-teacher conferences are held after the first and third nine weeks' grading periods. Parents receive the report cards at the conferences. If a parent does not attend a conference, the report card will be sent home with the student. Report cards for the second and fourth grading periods will be sent home after the grading periods end. Parents are encouraged to confer with teachers and administrators throughout the year concerning the progress of students. Appointments should be made through the school office. Safety Regulations - Bicycles/Motorcycles/ Other Vehicles Students may ride bicycles to school. Motor vehicles are not allowed. Bicycle riders must: 1. 2. 3. 4. Walk bicycles while on the schoolground to minimize the possibility of accidents. Observe the same traffic regulations required of automobile drivers. Ride single on the bicycle. Park in designated places and leave the area immediately. Bicycles may not be ridden during the day. 5. Skate boards and scooters should not be ridden on the school grounds. The school cannot be responsible for stolen bicycles\ntherefore, students are encouraged to use locks. Schedules Assignments to classes are based on available data and are generally expected to be permanent. If errors or changes in student enrollment should occur, the school staff will approve appropriate changes. School Breakfast Breakfast will be served in all elementary schools. In the case of late school openings because of inclement weather, breakfast will not be served. Students may pay on a daily basis in the breakfast line. The first school day of each week, reduced price and paying students may go to cafeteria before school and pay for any number of meals desired but not less than one week. School Closing In Inclement Weather Weather conditions sometimes force the cancellation or alternate scheduling of school. It is not always possible to provide in advance alternative plans and procedures for students to follow because of the varied circumstances of times and conditions that might arise. Therefore, the District administration is charged with the responsibility of making alternate plans, procedures and schedules as the weather conditions warrant and notifying students and parents through the means of broadcast and print media. The guiding principle will be the safety and welfare of the students. School Lunch Hot lunches are provided in the school cafeteria. Students are encouraged to participate in this nutritionally balanced program\nhowever, students may choose to bring a lunch from home. Students who have doctor verified milk allergies may have fruit juice with their lunch in lieu of milk. Each student who lives within five blocks of the school will be allowed to go home during the lunch period provided that a note is brought from the parents stating a desire 13 for a lunch permit to be granted. Students will not be excused to eat lunch anywhere else except at home, and only those students having a permit will be allowed to leave the school campus during the lunch period. The North Little Rock School District operates a lunch assistance program which complies with federal guidelines. Students may pay on a daily basis in the lunch line. The first school day of each week, reduced price and paying students may go to cafeteria before school and pay for any number of meals desired but not less than one week. School Supplies Parents are responsible for furnishing school supplies. Basic supplies are available for purchase at the school. Search, Seizure and Interrogation The District respects the rights of students' privacy and security against arbitrary invasion of their person or property. School officials do have the right, however, to search students and their property in the interest of the overall welfare of other students or when necessary to preserve order and discipline in the school. School authorities may conduct searches of student lockers, desks and automobiles when a reasonable cause exists to believe that stolen items or items prohibited by law or policy are contained in the area to be searched. School officials may seize illegal contraband, weapons or stolen property found in a search. The search of a student's person shall be conducted by a school official of the same sex and with an adult witness of the same sex present. Interrogations by Jaw enforcement authorities shall be conducted in private with the school principal or designee present. Efforts shall be made to have a parent or guardian present. In the event a parent or guardian cannot be present within a reasonable length of time, law enforcement officials shall be permitted to proceed with questioning. Seasonal Parties Seasonal parties are limited to two per year in the elementary schools. These are at Christmas and Valentine's Day. The Christmas party will be planned by the teachers and principal. The principal and teachers may work with parents in planning the Valentine's Day party. Other parties are at the discretion of the principal. Special Education A special education program is provided for handicapped students whose handicap-ping conditions result in educational deficits. Special education services are available for: l. Speech/Language handicapped 2. Learning disabled 3. Mentally retarded 4. Orthopedically handicapped 5. Emotionally disturbed 6. Severely/profoundly handicapped 7. Hearing or visually impaired 8. Other health impaired Referral for consideration to receive special education services may be made to the principal by teachers, administrators, parents, counselors and students. The decision for appropriate placement is made after all available data are reviewed by an evaluation/programming committee and appropriate school personnel. 14 Student Assignments School attendance zones for elementary, junior high school and high school students shall be established in accordance with the Federal Court ordered desegregation plan.  Students shall attend the schools as assigned by the District. If a family moves from one attendance zone to another during the final nine weeks of school, the students may, at the option of the parent or guardian, elect to complete the school year in either of the two zones. Students who establish residence in another school district may, at the option of the parents, continue enrollment in a North Little Rock school if the change in residence occurs within the final nine weeks of school. Student Behavior - Prohibited Conduct Appropriate learning opportunities can be afforded students only in an environment that is free from conflict, distraction, intimidation and various other influences that result from student misbehavior. Certain students' actions are beyond the definition of acceptable student behavior and are, therefore, prohibited in school and while traveling to and from school. Prohibited conduct may include, but is not limited to the following: 1. Disregard of directions or commands of teachers, administrators, bus drivers or other authorized school personnel. 2. Disruption and/ or interference with the normal and orderly conduct of school and school-sponsored activities. 3. Behavior that involves indecent and/or immoral acts. 4. Wagering or any form of gambling. 5. Physical abuse or assault to a school employee, other student or any other individual. 6. Possession of a knife, razor, ice pick, explosive, pistol, rifle, shotgun, pellet gun or any other object that can be considered a weapon or dangerous instrument. 7. Using, offering for sale, or selling alcoholic beverages, any narcotic drug as defined by Arkansas law, or what the student represents or believes to be any substance prohibited by the district policy on Drugs and Alcohol. 8. Destruction of or the attempt to destroy school property. 9. Stealing or the attempt to steal school property or the property belonging to an-other individual. 10. Cheating or copying the work of another student. 11. Failure to abide by attendance rules. 12. Use of profanity, vulgar language or obscene language. 13. Committing extortion, coercion, blackmail or forcing another person to act through the use of force or threat of force. 14. Engaging in verbal abuse such as namecalling, ethnic or racial slurs or using derogatory statements to other students, school personnel or other individuals. 15. Hazing. Hazing includes any willful act done by a student, either individually or with others, to another student for the purpose of subjecting the other student to indignity, humiliation, intimidation, physical abuse or tt.reats of abuse, social or other ostracism, shame or disgrace. The School District reserves the right to establish rules in addition to those appearing in this policy and to punish those who are guilty of their violation. Punishment may include corporal punishment, detention study hall, suspension and expulsion. Any of these disciplinary actions may occur on the first offense or any sub~ 15 quent offense depending upon the nature of the situation and the age of the student involved in the situation. The student shall be informed of the offense and shall be afforded an opportunity to explain the actions before disciplinary action is taken. Student Dress and Grooming The general climate of any school is reflected by the dress, grooming and manners of the students\ntherefore, students are expected to wear appropriate clothing and to present a neat appearance at all times. Students, with the help and approval of parents, know what is acceptable attire for school activities\nmoderation in type and style should be the basic standard. The following guidelines should be followed: 1. Grooming or dress which could cause blocked vision or restricted movement is discouraged, as well as dress styles that create or are likely to create a disruption of classroom order. No hats or sunglasses will be allowed to be worn in the building. 2. Clothing which displays profanity, nudity or suggestive comments or clothing that is supportive of illegal chemicals, tobacco products, alcoholic beverages, drug paraphernalia, etc. will not be tolerated. 3. Clothing or shoes made of materials or of such structure that cause damage to school facilities will not be permitted. 4. During warm weather, students will be permitted to wear shorts\nhowever, the appearance of students should not be disruptive to the educational atmosphere of the school. 5. For health and safety reasons, students must wear shoes at school at all times. 6. Clothing shall be clean and appropriate for school wear. Articles of dress which are distracting or which fail to conform to reasonable rules of decency shall not be worn. If, in the judgment of the administration, a student's attire is a health hazard or a distraction to the educational atmosphere of the school, the student will be asked to go home and make proper adjustments. Disciplinary action may occur if grooming or dress violations continue. Student Insurance An accident insurance policy is offered to all students at the beginning of the school year on a voluntary basis. Parents may choose school day coverage or 24 hour coverage. Expenses above and beyond either policy covered by the student accident insurance will be assumed by the parents. Student Records Authorized school personnel shall have access to students' records. The parent or legal guardian shall have access to his child's records upon written request to the principal. If a student is 18 years old or older, he/she has the right to determine who, outside of the school system, may have access to his/her records. A student's records may be released to other school systems upon the written request of the parent or guardian, or student if he/ she is 18 years old or older. A student's records may also be released to other school systems upon their request, provided that notification is given to the parent or legal guardian, or student if he/she is 18 years old or older. Parents have the right to request that the school withdraw material from a student's record. Refusal by the school entitles the parent to a hearing to determine if material is 16 accurate and appropriate. If at the hearing, material is ruled to be accurate, material remains in the file, but parents may prepare a statement to be placed with the material stating their objection. Statement is to be made available with objectional material whenever access is permitted. Directory information may be made available for noncommercial uses by the school principal without the prior consent of the parent. However, at the beginning of each school year, the parent may request that all or part of such information not be made available. Directory information shall be defined as: Student's name Address  Phone number Parent's name Grade level School(s) attended  Activity participation  Height and weight, if member of athletic team  Dates of attendance  Honors and awards received Student Suspension The Board of Education recognizes that many alternatives are necessary to a workable system for maintaining good student conduct. Among those alternatives is student suspension. The Board views student suspension as a serious matter and believes that all other less severe measures should be tried before students are excluded from the regular school experience. Within the scope of this policy, the school principal may suspend students for a peri-od of time not to exceed 10 days for any one action. The following guidelines are to be followed in imposing student suspensions: I. Suspensions are to be imposed only by the principal. 2. The principal shall advise a student who is to be suspended of the exact nature of the misconduct and shall give the student the opportunity to express his/her perception of the facts of the matter. 3. Suspended elementary students must be released only to the parent or guardian. 4. The parent or legal guardian and the Superintendent of Schools shall be given written notice of each suspension. The notice shall include the specific reason(s) for the suspension, its duration, the manner in which the student is to be readmitted to school and (if appropriate) the method through which the suspension may be reviewed or appealed. The notice shall be mailed to the parent or legal guardians at the address reflected on the student's records on the day the suspension is imposed. If a suspension exceeds four school days in addition to the day the suspension is imposed, the parent shall be notified of the right to have the decision to suspend reviewed by the Assistant Superintendent for Student Affairs. At the review, the student and the student's parent or legal guardian may make statements and present evidence. The Assistant Superintendent may sustain, revoke, terminate or otherwise modify the suspension. The student, parent of record, the principal and the Superintendent of Schools shall be notified of the Assistant Superintendent's decision on the day the review is completed. Students may be suspended for the violation of rules established by the school and within the scope of policies adopted by the Board. 17 Suspension imposed for periods of time in excess of 10 days shall be treated procedurally as an expulsion. All students returning to school at the expiration of a suspension must be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian. Tardies Promptness to class is necessary in order to maximize learning opportunities for all students. Students are, therefore, expected to be in class and ready for instruction at the appointed time. Excessive tardies will necessitate disciplinary action. Telephones School telephones are for school business only. Students will be called to the phone only in case of emergencies. Important messages will be delivered by office personnel. Parents desiring to talk with teachers should call the office and leave a phone number. The calls will be returned at a convenient time. When pay phones are available, use will be regulated by building rules. Testing Program Standardized tests are administered in grades two through six. In accordance with state regulations, minimum performance tests are administered to students in grades three and six. Textbooks The North Little Rock School District furnishes textbooks to all students and provides access to library books and other media materials. Loss or destruction of books or other media materials will result in payment to the school district. Tobacco and Tobacco Products Students shall not be permitted to have tobacco products (including matches and lighters) in their possession. This restriction applies to students at school, on school grounds, at bus stops, on school buses and/or at any school-sponsored event during or after regular school hours. Transfers The students of the North Little Rock School District will attend school according to assigned residence zones or as assigned under the Federal Court-ordered desegregation plan. The only exceptions are for medical or programming reasons. If a f arnily moves from one attendance zone to another during the final nine weeks of school, the student may, at the option of the parent or guardian, elect to complete the school year in either of the two zones. Visitors All visitors are required to register with office personnel. Classroom visitations should be arranged in advance through the principal's office. Student visitors in the classroom are strongly discouraged and should be permitted only after careful consideration by the building principal. 18 Weapons and Dangerous Instruments No student shall possess, handle, or transmit any object that can reasonably be considered a weapon: 1. On the school grounds during, before, or after school, 2. On the school grounds at any other time when the school is being used by a school group, or 3. Off the school grounds at any school bus stop, or at any school activity, function, or event. A weapon is defined as a firearm, knife, explosive device, or any other instrument or device capable of causing bodily harm. Expulsion from school may result and/ or criminal charges may be filed against any student who has possession of a weapon as described herein. Yearbook No commerciallyp reparedy earbooks hall be produceda t the elementarys chool level. 19\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eNorth Little Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"geh_southline_173","title":"Ella Mae Brayboy","collection_id":"geh_southline","collection_title":"Southline Press, Inc. Photographs","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, Auburn Avenue, 33.755509, -84.376596"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1989"],"dcterms_description":["Portrait of Civil Rights Activist Ella Mae Brayboy.","Mrs. Ella Mae Wade Brayboy (1918-2010) was a community activist in Atlanta, Georgia, best known for her work with voter registration in Atlanta becoming one of the first black deputy registrars in Atlanta in 1964. She was a native of Atlanta, graduating from Booker T. Washington High School in 1935 and attending Spelman College."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":["VIS 158.01.01","ahc158001001a.jpg"],"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Southline Press, Inc. Photographs, Atlanta History Center"],"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights leaders--Georgia--Atlanta","Voter registration--Georgia--Atlanta"],"dcterms_title":["Ella Mae Brayboy"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/digital/collection/southline/id/173"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S. Code) Permission for use must be cleared through The Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":["photographs"],"dcterms_extent":["8 x 10 in. black and white print"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Brayboy, Ella Mae, 1918-2010"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tmll_hpcrc_68908279","title":"The employment of minorities and women by Kentucky state government","collection_id":"tmll_hpcrc","collection_title":"Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Kentucky, 38.20042, -84.87762"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Commission on Civil Rights. Kentucky Advisory Committee"],"dc_date":["1989"],"dcterms_description":["A digital version of the report published by the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","Requires Acrobat plug-in to view files."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Minorities--Employment--Kentucky","Women--Employment--Kentucky","African Americans--Employment--Kentucky","Affirmative action programs--Kentucky","Discrimination in employment--Kentucky","Kentucky--Officials and employees"],"dcterms_title":["The employment of minorities and women by Kentucky state government"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Thurgood Marshall Law Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":["http://www2.law.umaryland.edu/Marshall/usccr/documents/cr12em7z.pdf"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://crdl.usg.edu/id:tmll_hpcrc_68908279"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports","records"],"dcterms_extent":["30 p. : ill."],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1074","title":"Exhibits: Unitary hearing, Pulaski County Special School District, 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":null,"dc_date":["1989/1998"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational statistics","School integration","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Exhibits: Unitary hearing, Pulaski County Special School District, 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/1074"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nExhibit numbers 417-425\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\n........ AO 187 (Rev. 1/80) ID DATE V V V V v v v V v- V v r -, V V V v V .j,/ EXHIBITS Identification No. ~ 2. \"It.=? Ir tt5 1'4'? ~ Mi\u0026lt;ID .+- II t+-t~ #, 1\"3 if I ~ 1'5 t. 11 ii\u0026gt; I 'a 11\\rlI I lf .lo I 1f ~ I 'i Rulings Offer/Rec'd) t Q _LfLG~ C. C. ~ 'i-1.\\~-3 C. ~ 4 C'J.l.j\n). i C, C. ' Ct~33 C.Y-~ ~ C:..X~31 L)\u0026lt;'S 0 vs. N LR.SD DESCRIPTION C. e, c.sso ' . ... + ... +~ t\"\"~ oi-+s \\.s -\\-~\\-c+\\'c. h ~ e.se~t'.C\"~ab'M .Pion Pc..u \\ 6 L.\\ \\ S~c ~s ~c.T\"\" h .. ~c,...\\...., r1-,,..i:,..~s. bR-C-~~-8t..l CAUSE NO. C. ubjectio 187  r\u0026lt;~v. I /80) GI ~J ~t y_k, b,-~5 Plft Deft) DATE I I EXHIBITS No. J Identification Rulings Offer/Rec'd) 3 C\n'f. 4~ c_ 44'5 c_ ~ '-l L/ l, \u0026lt;L.- ~ 14 '1 c., yg ci i./ \"tq ~'I, ~so ~ 1i'5\\ C.t 4S :l C l..{S:) e, L.{S'-1- C-i i 5'5 c_y.. i.\\S(p I C'j.'151 lci~s'6 lc.t4'5 I LRSD vs. DESCRIITION 0~ \" JI ll h I\\ 1, ) ' h l' l I' 1, l, ,, Q_ V\\~ +-~ \"\"3 ~c:sso fl\\ e.V'/\\ OD 00 ,, ,, ,, \" f'C,SSD ~b \\oM LR -C-5{:l-- ?i' Ll CAUSE NO. 0 Vl O~-- d- - \\ i-7 ~ .\n:i -d-'7 .:'1 ~-\\i-'i~ r~ Buw ~s ~ -~5-'1 Eld, ' Col I ,'n.s\nl.-d-.,, -'t :-\u0026gt; J--\\f-\"Vi' C-k,- ~-~S -'i8' .._ e..i-\nl-j.}--4? -\\-n \"'\"'- Bow c: - l -, i 0 f .).-4-, +u Lc:~~er- ,'CSSD rc.ssn I \" 3-\n,.. - '} 1, lo S-\\3- ,, ' h ~ .).- . ,, \\I \"l- 11- , .6 187 . (Rev. I /80) S ubjection DATE   V   ./  ./  J/ V  // V---.~ ii  I v I EXHIBITS No. Identification I I I I I I Rulings Offer/Rec'd) C \u0026lt;'.!., t14\u0026amp;1 C'i. 4'10 ~ ri I c., 111 ~ c_ ti\\-'1 3 Ct \"1'1 ~ C. L./'15 Q. 111i 1 L\\?.SD vs. DESCRIITION Le Sc Pc.s:5 o S-ecur-1 ,,.. ,- LR.-\u0026lt;\u0026gt;i\ni.-rl l CAUSE NO. EDWARD L. WRIGHT 7 (19031977) ROBERT S. LINDSEY {,9131991) ISAAC A. SCOTT, JR . JOHN G. LILE GORDON S. RATHER , JR. TERRY L. MATHEWS DAVID M. POWELL ROGER A. GLASGOW C. DOUGLAS BUFORD. JR. PATRICK J. GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS. JR. JOHN R. TISDALE KATHLYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES Ill JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY Ill LEE J . MULDROW N.M. NORTON EDGAR J . TYLER CHARLES C. PRICE CHARLES T. COLEMAN JAMES J . GLOVER EDWIN L. LOWTHER. JR. CHARLES L. SCHLUMBERGER SAMMYE L. TAYLOR WALTER E. MAY GREGORY T. JONES H. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E. BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPADOEN Ms. Ann Brown WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2200 LITTLE ROCK. ARKAN SAS 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX ( 501) 3769442 OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS RONALD A . MAY M. TODD WOOD Writer 's Direct Dlal No. 5012121345 ajones@wlj .com July 10, 1998 Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham Street Little Rock AR 72201 RE: PCSSD Hearing Dear Ms. Brown: I enclose copies of PCSSD's Exhibits as follows: Exhibit ex 450-Evaluation Report 1994-1995 Exhibit ex 451-Evaluation Report 1995-1996 Exhibit ex 452-Evaluation Report 1996-1997 ROGER 0 . ROWE NANCY BELLHOUSE MAY JOHN D. DAVIS JU DY SIMMONS HENRY KIM BERLY WOOD TUCKER RAY F. COX, JR. HARR Y S. HURST , JR. TROY A. PRICE PATRICIA A. SIEVERS JAMES M. MOODY, JR. KATHRYN A. PRYOR J . MARK DAVIS CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK K EVIN W. KENNEDY J ERR Y J . SA LLINGS FRED M. PERKINS Ill WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0 . BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER B ETSY MEACHAM AIN SLEY H. LA NG KYLE R. WILSON C. TAD BOHANNON DON S. McKINNEY MICHELE SIMMONS ALLGOOD KRISTI M. MOODY J . CHARLES DOUGHERTY M. SEAN HATCH PHYLLIS M. McKENZIE ELISA MASTERSON WHITE Exhibit ex 453-PeSSD Office of Desegregation Second Semester Monitoring Report August 15, 1995 Exhibit ex 454 -Pesso Office of Desegregation First Semester Monitoring Report March 12, 1996 Exhibit ex 455-PeSSD Office of Desegregation Second Semester Monitoring Report August 13, 1996 Exhibit ex 456-PeSSD Office of Desegregation First Semester Monitoring Report February 11, 1997 WRIGHT , LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP Ann Brown July 10, 1998 Page 2 Exhibit ex 457-PCSSD Office of Desegregation Second Semester Monitoring Report July 17, 1997 Exhibit ex 458-PeSSD SAT 8 Testing Report 1994-95 Very truly yours, Enclosures ALJ/cjh WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP ~~-~ Angell L. Jones Legal Assistant EDWARD L WRIGHT 7 (1903-1977) ROBERTS LINDSEY ( 1913-1991) ISAAC A. SCOTT , JR. JOHN G. LILE GORDON S. RATHER, JR. TERRY L. MATHEWS DAVID M. POWELL ROGER A. GLASGOW C. DOUGLAS BUFORD, JR . PATRICK J . GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS, JR. JOHN R. TISDALE KATHLYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES 111 JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY 111 LEE J . MULDROW N M. NORTON EDGAR J . TYLER CHARLES C. PRICE CHARLES T. COLEMAN JAMES J . GLOVER EDWIN L . LOWTHER, JR . CHARLES L. SCHLUMBERGER SAMMYE L. TAYLOR WALTER E. MAY GREGORY T. JONES H. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E. BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPADDEN Ms. Ann Brown WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2200 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3699 (501) 371 -0808 FAX (501) 376-9442 OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS RONALD A . MAY M. TODD WOOD Writer 's Direct Dial No . 501-212-1345 aj ones@wlj .com July 10, 1998 Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham Street Little Rock AR 72201 RE: PeSSD Hearing - Dear Ms. Brown: I enclose copies of PeSSD's Exhibits as follows: Exhibit ex 450-Evaluation Report 1994-1995 Exhibit ex 451-Evaluation Report 1995-1996 Exhibit ex 452-Evaluation Report 1996-1997 ROGER D. ROWE NANCY BELLHOUSE MAY JOHN D DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER RAY F . COX, JR. HARRY S. HURST, JR . TROY A . PRICE PATRICIA A. SIEVERS JAMES M. MOODY, JR. KATHRYN A. PRYOR J . MARK DAVIS CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK KEVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J . SALLINGS FRED M. PERKINS Ill WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL D. BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER BETSY MEACHAM AINSLEY H. LANG KYLE R. WILSON C. TAD BOHANNON DON S. McKINNEY MICHELE SIMMONS ALLGOOD KRISTI M. MOODY J . CHARLES DOUGHERTY M. SEAN HATCH PHYLLIS M. McKENZIE ELISA MASTERSON WHITE Exhibit ex 453-PeSSD Office of Desegregation Second Semester Monitoring Report August 15, 1995 Exhibit ex 454 -Pesso Office of Desegregation First Semester Monitoring Report March 12, 1996 Exhibit ex 455-PeSSD Office of Desegregation Second Semester Monitoring Report August 13, 1996 Exhibit ex 456-PeSSD Office of Desegregation First Semester Monitoring Report February 11, 1997 WRIGHT , LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP Ann Brown July 10, 1998 Page 2 Exhibit ex 457-PeSSD Office of Desegregation Second Semester Monitoring Report July 17, 1997 Exhibit ex 458-PeSSD SAT 8 Testing Report 1994-95 Very truly yours, Enclosures ALJ/cjh WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS LLP ~~-~ Angell L. Jones Legal Assistant Little Rock School District 1995-96 Budget Analysis Function Function Description ~ 2539 Other Facilities Acq \u0026amp;Co 2542 Upkeep of Buildings 2541 Service Area Direction 2544 Upkeep of Equipment 2545 Vehicle Maintenance 2548 Asbestos Program Magnet Schools Substitutes Amount $240,213 8,924,431, 201,085/ 12,800, 63,200., 61,388 1,076,870 200,000 Total $10,779,987 (G-t :V-llj LOSS FUNDING ADD ON CALC. WITH M-to-M'S COUNTEDfTRUST FD. NOT INC./STATE USED THIS METHOD YEAR A.D.M. A.D.M. W/M-to-M\"S 3 YR. AVE. DIFF. LF PER. LFWADM USED S.B.E.R. ADD-ON VAL. 1990-91 21,720.18 21,977.24 1991-92 21,590.45 21,849.46 1992-93 21,032.91 21,449.70 21,758.80 309.10 44.69% 1993-94 20,494.90 20,911.69 21,403.62 491.93 62.30% 138.14 138.14 $2,494.92 $344,648.25 1994-95 306.47 306.47 $2,594.97 $795,280.46 LOSS FUNDING ADD ON CALC. WITHOUT M-to-M'S COUNTEDfTRUST FUND NOT INC. YEAR A.D.M. 3 YR. AVE. DIFF. LF PER. LFWADM USED DIFF. S.B.E.R. ADD-ON VAL. FUND. LOSS 1990-91 21,720.18 1991-92 21,590.45 1992-93 21,032.91 21,447.85 414.94 44.69% 1993-94 20,494.90 21,039.42 544.52 63.00% 185.44 138.14 47.30 $2,494.92 $462,645.98 $117,997.73 1994-95 343.05 306.47 36.58 $2,594.97 $890,198.23 $94,917.77 LOSS FUNDING ADD ON CALC. WITH M-to-M'S COUNTED \u0026amp; TRUST INCLUDED YEAR A.D.M. A.D.M. W/M-to-M'S 3 YR. AVE. DIFF. LF PER. LFWADM USED S.B.E.R. ADD-ON VAL. FUND. LOSS 1990-91 21,720.18 21,977.24 1991-92 21,590.45 21,849.46 1992-93 21,032.91 21,449.70 21,758.80 309.10 51.35-k 1993-94 20,494.90 20,911.69 21,403.62 491.93 93.97% 158.72 138.14 $2,494.92 $396,000.81 $51,352.56 1994-95 462.26 306.47 $2,594.97 $1,199,559.89 $404,279.43 LOSS FUNDING ADD ON CALC. WITHOUT M-to-M'S COUNTED \u0026amp; TRUST INCLUDED YEAR A.D.M. 3 YR. AVE. DIFF. LF PER. LFWADM USED DIFF. S.B.E.R. ADD-ON VAL. FUND. LOSS b~u-91 .::'.1,t \u0026lt;'.U.11::1 1991-92 21,590.45 1992-93 21,032.91 21,447.85 414.94 51.35% 1993-94 20,494.90 21,039.42 544.52 93.97% 213.07 138.14 74.93 $2,494.92 $531,592.55 $186,944.30 1994-95 511.69 306.47 205.22 $2,594.97 $1,327,808.38 $532,527.92 ~ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. PCSSD'S WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LIST RECen,~ OFFICE Oi DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTER VENO RS INTERVENORS The PCSSD submits the following as its exhibit and witness - list: EXHIBIT LIST 1. 1989 Releases (attached to Settlement Agreement ) 2. ODM Racial Balance Reports 3. Charts from PCSSD Petition for Release From Federal Court Supervision. 4. Staff Development Data 5. Charts pertaining to cheerleading, drill team, student government, Beta Club, and National Honor Society. 6. Affirmative Action Reports 7. Discipline Reports 8. Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline 9. Secondary Education Report 10. Counselor's Reports 11. Special Education Reports 12. Gifted and Talented Reports 13. Athletic Reports 14. Non-Athletic Reports 15. Biracial Committee Minutes 16. PCSSD Desegregation Plan 17. Interdistrict Desegregation Plan 18. PCU 1039 (Minority AP student recruitment) 19. PCU 1040 (Social Studies Advanced Placement Recommendation Notice). 20. PCU 1041 (Social Studies Advanced Placement Recommendation Followup Student Conference form). 21. The Special Master's Interim Findings and Recommendations concerning PCSSD geography and demographics, dated August 19, 1988, as previously transmitted to the Court on January 20, 1994. WITNESS LIST 1. Bobby Lester, Superintendent, PCSSD\n2. Bill Bowles, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation, PCSSD\n3. Eddie Collins, Assistant Superintendent for Pupil Personnel Services, PCSSD\n2 4. Dr. Bobby Altom, Assistant Superintendent for Instruction\n5. Gary Miller, Assistant Superintendent for Personnel\n6. Don Stewart, Assistant Superintendent for Business Affairs\n7. Ed Hogan, Assistant Superintendent for Support Services\n8. Charles Green, Director of Secondary Education\n9. Tommie Sue Anthony, Director of Gifted and Talented Programs\n10. Martha Kay Asti, Director of Special Education\n11. Brenda Bowles, Coordinator of Multi-Cultural Education. WITNESSES VIA PREVIOUS TESTIMONY 12. 1988 Testimony of Ed Hogan, docket No. 1059-A, dated June 16, 1988, page Nos. 6 through 213\nand docket No. 1060-A, dated June 17, 1988, page Nos. 6 through 162. 13. Douglas A. Ask, Docket No. 2540 , testimony beginning at page 95 . 14. Bill Bowles, by recent deposition not yet transcribed. 15. Dr. Bobby Altom, by recent deposition not yet transcribed (including previous testimony given in open court in this case, the docket reference for which we have not yet located). 3 . ...__ - - AO 187 (Rev. 1/80) fll EXHIBITS DATE No. tit 2. 1t~ V It V ~'5 V *-~ V v v .I-v Ms ID V .+- II ~ it I~ V iH3 v ~l v - -+t 1'5 V \\,I, V 11 v -IP I 'B v I ti,- lI V I lt-.,lo v' I lf ~I Identification ~ Rulings Offer/Rec'd) t C. _L..f 1~ c_ c i11~-3 C. ~ 4.l C'i ~d-i C,\"\" ~ C. {_ ~31 c-,_ t.133 c.~ '1 'i e..14~ C. tt.\\ :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;o C..X~3'7 vs. N LRSD DESCRIPTION ce., C..SSD ' r+s rt-or+ s 1- ... \\-s ?..:+ \\.,, ~ {. \\ 'c, \\.~ s. B1,~c..~ \\ D 4D Pc..u \\ 6 ~ l S~c l\".s 1-c.r- \\i.,~e,.-,._ F,\"'-d,\n..,.~!i. bR -L-1?:). -S' l. l CAUSE NO. C. . . . 187 .  t{ev. I /80) 1B LR.SD ~,\u0026amp; ~5 y_ k, 6/ ~ s LB -C-~\"J.- b' ll. Plft Deft) vs. CAUSE NO. - ~1-..RSD EXHIBITS Identification ubjection~ DATE Rulings DESCRIPTION No. Offer/Rec'd) ' b- ).Ci-'1~ c.,x ~39 ~ -~\n-l-1 ~\"' o{. ~b~-i I\\) -t-ov-i ot J- \\ i-4 ~ I I c_'{ h\\ 46 \" JI \\DMW\\\\J A-,J-k,hnJ .)-J'l .:c, ~ . l\u0026lt; h \\ I c., 'l ~ Li l 6 :1, B:,1.,\nle s. ~-\\i-'i~ (!__ '{ \"-l Lt\n}... 1, 1, Br~ G\u0026gt;uw!es ~-\n.}..5-C,S? (1,~ 4 3 ) \\ II EJJ .~ G,1 i.'n.s ol.-Jf} .qg C,jy~'-1 l, 1 ~ rvi:lles' d--\\~\"-1? I c_ 'f. ~45 /\\ ,, C..k,-lc-, G~ee V\\ .\n\u0026gt;. - .\ni.s -'i 8' .... ~~ 141..jl, l, ,, ,l/ \"Bobt,,-.1 Le.st-er\n.i-\\J.-4? I  ~Y.. i.l 4 '7 Q_ V\\~ D ~ ex' r'3 ~r\\o:?,.,_~\\nn E.1c--e'l\"\"o\\.- (::L\":..,e~I \\ -..) I - lt-.30-'j f L, '{_ LJL,l g ~c.sso ()\\~V't\\o -\\-n ~ Boi.) le 'S. t,, - I -'i i ''--...... t\n3/J Jjf C~ i_f '-/Cl l\\\\el\"f\\.o fr.,_ Bo'ob~ 1'.ll+cm 0 f .i-'-f-'i'7 +u Li=~~c,- (:,'I, ~ so l~ct4-ti5\"' Evalua~,~ ....  R-Pl\u0026gt;dr-.\\- -r~sso I C.:'/._ ~ '5\\ Mq5 _q l, E va/1,,,,l.,\",., ... R\"'-oor-f- fc,SSO ' C.'L 4S :l 19,l.-9'1 E val~at-1 On (\u0026gt;pDC,r +- fC.S.SD . \\ . c, --\\5':) OD\\'l\\ S-cond -5.e .... ,..c:Jf't- fl'\\.I) n,+11r ,no Retort \u0026lt;il-\\S-'i'S .....) . ,. ~ C, J.. L.\\ 5'-t l-1..::. t\" ,, --. onrn I' \" 3-~-~L ~ii5~ ., \" DDIY\\ St\" ,.\"\".._,l ., s-r~ -qL I c_y.. 1,5(,, Fus\\- ,, ,. 6DIY\\\n). - \\\\ - 'i' '1 - I ,. \\I - C'1.\"i51 6Drt1 Secord \"t ~ \\1-'l 1 - I I \\ Ctl.\\S~ f'c..sso Tc,~\nV\\Q R~Gll\"I\"' \\- ,,~4-q5 - I '1 ... ,_~~ ....:i ' lct4'5q P,c~l..lre w) Te,LL, ~,.. - I I . I j - .o 187 (Rev. I /80) e ubjection DATE   V v  ./    J/ V v V V -.,   - I v I V EXHIBITS No. Identification I Rulings Offer/Rec'd) C C, ~ t141,1 C.' '-l'lD (..\n'l I c... 111 ~ C. 't'l 3 C.'J_ '-4'1 ~ C, '-1'15 c.. 4'7i 1 1g ,~ I G vs. CAUSE NO. rv LQS o DESCRIPTION \\( ~ Te.r M 1n +, ~lo\\. Le d, J '1'i ,-,-+-'i'l +o \u0026amp;w es 1'1-'tf Sdu..r~a. .- I-Sc St 1.4c:J. CA\\ Bowe Pc..ss o 5-ecl.H't fu ~o l.JA -e\\\"\" ~.f.ecl ' -'l-i'i1 to L~ +i:f\" c,... .,1.~~cd ~-4 -C,'7 MAR 9 i99B Qff\\CE Of -~1\\0tt MOtt\\lOR\\I\u0026amp; I EXHIBIT 1 RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE For and in consideration of its payments and commitments set forth in the Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement Agreement to which this release is attached (hereafter, \"the Consideration\"), the undersigned parties do hereby release, acquit and forever discharge the State of Arkansas, its constitutional officers, elected officials, appointees, employees, agencies, departments, their predecessors and successors including, but not limited to, the Arkansas State Board of Education and its members (hereafter collectively referred to as \"the Released Parties\") of and from any and all actions, causes of action, claims and demands which the undersigned now have or may hereafter have arising out of or in any way related to any acts or omissions of any and every kind to the date of the execution of this release by the released parties which in any way relate to racial discrimination or segregation in public education in the three school districts in Pulaski County, Arkansas or to the violation of constitutional or other rights of school children based on race or color in the three school districts in Pulaski County, Arkansas. It is understood and agreed that the Consideration is valuable and is given in full and final compromise of disputed claims and that the giving of the Consideration is not to be construed as an admission of any liability on the part of any of the Released Parties beyond 2 the liability found to date by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas and the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and that the terms of this release are contractual and not a mere recital. It is further understood and agreed that the litigation now pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Western Division, entitled Little Rock School District vs. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, et al, No. LR-C-82-866 and cases consolidated therein and their predecessors (the \"Litigation\") is to be dismissed with prejudice as to the Arkansas State Board of Education and the former and current members of that board named in the Litigation. We have read this release and had it explained to us by our attorneys who have signed as witnesses hereto and we understand that the above referenced payments or commitments are in full and final compromise of any and all claims and causes of action. We understand that in the event all parties for which there is a signature blank below do not sign this release, the release is effective and binding on those parties that do sign. EXECUTED this ~day of _.d....J...'f..: J .. .i. _ _ , 191J by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 200 First Commercial Building Little Rock, AR 72201 - By: Christopner Hell r One of its Attorney 3 * * * * * EXECUTED THIS /Slf_ day of --'-)A_e11-+y ____ , 19JJ by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock, AR 72201 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 * * * * * EXECUTED this J'JIA_ day of ~IL#. f~ \"!- , ~ by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: JACK LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 3400 TCBY Tower Little ROCK SCHOOL * * * * * EXECUTED this\n\u0026gt;st-- day of -~.\u0026amp;a.a.a.\n...._ __ , 19:J. by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: (NAACP) LEGAL AND EDUCATIONAL DEFEN I and Attorneys WALKER, P.A. Broadway Rock, A its Attorneys ... THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS ~t:~ ay \u0026lt;8:n Oo ~ By~===-----::16'1\"-:-+--=----rF-~'-:-,---:Little Rock, Arkansas , I 4 * * * * * EXECUTED this~~~ay o~E. WITNESSED AND APPROVED: MITCHELL \u0026amp; ROACHELL L' tl ~ock, A~2~01 l~lW. Third B  I,,\\ (_A__. Richard w. Roachell One of its Attorneys . ' I '' I RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THE LRSD For and in consideration of its relinquishment of claims and commitments set forth in the Plans and the Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement Agreement to which this release is attached {hereafter, the Consideration), the undersigned parties do hereby release, acquit and forever discharge the LRSD its directors, administrators, appointees, employees, agencies, departments, their predecessors and successors (hereafter collectively referred to as the Released Parties) of and from any and all actions, causes of action, claims . and demands which the undersigned now have or may hereafter have arising out of or in any way related to any acts or omissions of any and every kind to the date of the execution of this release by the released parties which in any way relate to racial discrimination, segregation in public education, or to violations of other constitutional or statutory iights of school children, based on race or color, in the three school districts in Pulaski County, Arkansas. It is understood and agreed that the Consideration is valuable and is given in full and final compromise of disputed claims and that the giving of the Consideration is not to be construed as an admission of any liability on the part of any of the Released Parties beyond the liability found to date by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas and the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and 2 that the terms of this release are contractual and not a mere recital. It is further understood and agreed that the litigation now pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Western Division, entitled Little Rock School District vs. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, et al, No. LR-C-82-866 and cases consolidated therein and their predecessors (including, but not limited to, Cooper v. Aaron, Norwood v. Tucker and Clark v. Board of Educatic,n of the Little Rock School District) (the \"Litigation\") is to be dismissed with prejudice as to the LRSD and the former and current members of its board named in the Litigation. This dismissal is final for all purposes except that the Court may retain jurisdiction to address issues regarding implementation of the Plans. We have read this release and had it explained to us by our attorneys who have signed as witnesses hereto and we understand that the above referenced relinquishment of claims and commitments are in full and final compromise of any and all claims and causes of action. We understand that in the event all parties for which there is a signature blank below do not sign this release, the release is effective and binding on those parties that do sign. ' ' 3 I EXECUTED this tf day of ft'-4r , 199l by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: ALLEN LAW FIRM A Professional Association 1200 Worthen Bank Bldg. Little Rock, AR 72201 By: f?\u0026lt;'V.:\n:_,(fll__ H. William Allen One of its Attorneys ARKANSAS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION By 2f d,,4(..t U Y'J.  t-1,fj~ Cha rma.A, Board of Directors * * * * * EXECUTED this / f~ day of _/A..__ .o.... -y+---' 199. by: WITNES-.ED AND APPROVED: WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock, AR 72201 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 t, Board of Directors * * * * * .r: I tC:,'fl EXECUTED this dJ/L day of 1:21~ , 1-5,0-oy: WITNESSED AND APPROVED:~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL JACK LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. DISTRICT 3400 TCBY Tower Littl * * WITNESSED AND APPROVED: (NAACP) LEGAL AND EDUCATIONAL DEFENSE FUND, INC. By.,_ ______ ~---- Norman J. Chachkin One of its Attorneys and of Directors * * * THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS BRSDy Cas~s ReIp #sent~ative By9c0a. Q~ President, Little Rock, Arkansas Branch of the NAACP 4 W. WALKER, P.A. B Broadway k, AR NLRSD s Represent and President of the Little Rock, Arkansas Branch n w. Walker ne of its Attorneys Byofthe~~ ~~ntative * * * * * EXECUTED this d-~day of-JI...~ E, , 199L by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: MITCHELL \u0026amp; ROACHELL 10 . Third ttl ~eek, ~2 1 201 -u,\\.. l.A.__ Richard W. Roachell One of its Attorneys KNIGHT INTERVENORS RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THE PCSSD For and in consideration of its relinquishment of claims and commitments set forth in the Plans and the Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement Agreement to which this release is attached (hereafter, \"the Consideration\"), the undersigned parties do hereby release, acquit and forever discharge appointees, the PCSSD, employees, its directors, administrators, agencies, departments, their predecessors and successors (hereafter collectively referred to as \"the Released Parties\") of and from any and all actions, causes of action, claims and demands which the undersigned now have or may hereafter have arising out of or in any way related to any acts or omissions of any and every kind to the date of the execution of this release by the released parties which in any way relate to racial discrimination, segregation in public education, or to violations of other constitutional or statutory rights of school children, based on race or color, in the three school districts in Pulaski County, Arkansas. It is understood and agreed that the Consideration is valuable and is given in full and final compromise of disputed claims and that the giving of the Consideration is not to be construed as an admission of any liability on the part of any of the Released Parties beyond the liability found to date by the United States District Court for the Eastern 2 District of Arkansas and the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and that the terms of this release are contractual and not a mere recital. It is further understood and agreed that the litigation now pending in the United States District Court :or the Eastern District of Arkansas, Western Division, entitled Little Rock School District vs. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, et al, No. LR-C-82-866 and cases consolidated therein and their predecessors (including, but not limited to, Zinnamorr v. Pulaski County School District, LR-C-68-154) (the \"Litigation\") is to be dismissed with prejudice as to the PCSSD and the former and current members of its board named in the Litigation. This dismissal is final for all purposes except that the Court may retain jurisdiction to address issues regarding implementation of the Plans. We have read this release and had it explained to us by our attorneys who have signed as witnesses hereto and we understand that the above referenced relinquishment of claims and cornmi trnents are in full and final compromise of any and all claims and causes of action. We understand that in the event all parties for which there is a signature blank below do not sign this release, the release is effective and binding on those parties that do sign. EXECUTED this WITNESSED AND APPROVED: FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 3 Little Rock, AR 72201 /7BY.,,.,.._\"\"-+-::,---,---------,,.....:....--=--__,,--__ _:By~~\u0026lt;~ Presid~nt, Christophertteffir / -----One of its Attorneys * * * * * EXECUTED THIS / 3ft day of \u0026lt;: , 199f by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: ALLEN LAW FIRM A Profe~ional Corporation 1200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock, AR 72201 By: ~~(lu__ H. William Allen One of its Attorneys ARKANSAS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION * * * * * EXECUTED this day WITNESSED AND APPROVED: of~ ,by: JACK LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 3400 TCBY Tower ::w.RE S't.e en W. Jo s One of its At orneys NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT * * * * * EXECUTED this --- day of ______ , 1990 by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: (NAACP) LEGAL AND EDUCATIONAL DEFENSE FUND, INC. By ____ --..,....,.------ Norrnan J. Chachkin One of its Attorneys and THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS By_/~~~ ~ Class-.,ptesentative By oJk__ ~sb President, Little Rock, Arkansas Branch of the NAACP JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 s. Broadway Litt~ Rock, AR 72201 r--V\"---'a n W. Walker ne of its Attorneys 4 Clas Repres and President of e North Little Rock, Arkansas Branch By cg~jL__, PCSSD Class Representative * * * * * ~ -~ _J EXECUTED this'' day of ~C: , 1991 by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: MITCHELL \u0026amp; ROACHELL L' ttl ~ck, (AFf') ~2201 l~W. Third By ., w\\LL__ Richard W. Roachell One of its Attorneys KNIGHT INTERVENORS 4 ~ By . - (Ui~.f/j LRC A Re~resent tive By~~~q-~~4-SL.~~c:::J::~~By~~~....::\n. i,......,.....,.\"\"\"\"\"....,,.........~-_..:\n.....\n._ _ ,r1esen a ive RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THE NLRSD For and in consideration of its relinquishment of claims and commitments set forth in the Plans and the Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement Agreement to which this release is attached (hereafter, \"the Consideration\"), the undersigned parties do hereby release, acquit and forever discharge the NLRSD, its directors, administrators, appointees, employees, agencies, departments, their predecessors and successors (hereafter collectively referred to as \"the Released Parties\") of and from any and all actions, causes of action, claims and demands which the undersigned now have or may hereafter have arising out of or in any way related to any acts or omissions of any and every kind to the date of the execution of this release by the released parties which in any way relate to racial discrimination, segregation in public education, or to violations of other constitutional or statutory rights of school children, based on race or color, in the three school districts in Pulaski County, Arkansas. It is understood and agreed that the Consideration is valuable and is given in full and final compromise of disputed claims and that the giving of the Consideration is not to be construed as an admission of any liability on the part of any of the Released Parties beyond the liability found to date by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas and the Court of Appeals for the Eighth 2 Circuit and that the terms of this release are contractual and not a mere recital. It is further understood and agreed that the litigation now pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Western Division, entitled Little Rock School District vs. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, et al, No. LR-C-82-866 and cases consolidated therein and their predecessors (including, but not limited to, Graves v. Board of Education of North Little Rock School District and Davis v. Board of Education of the North Little Rock School District (the \"Litigation\") is to be dismissed with prejudice as to the NLRSD and the former and current members of its board named in the Litigation. This dismissal is final for all purposes except that the Court may retain jurisdiction to address issues regarding implementation of the Plans. We have read this release and had it explained to us by our attorneys who have signed as witnesses hereto and we understand that the above referenced relinquishment of claims and conuni tments are in full and final compromise of any and all claims and causes of action. We understand that in the event all parties for which there is a signature blank below do not sign this release, the release is effective and binding on those parties that do sign. 3 EXECUTED this ~~ay of _{Ji__.'\"'\"'.J...t. ..(.. _ , 19 9i by: I WITNESSED AND APPROVED: FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. Little Rock, AR 72201 By One of its Attorney * * * * * EXECUTED THIS /ft day of ..... faf.__=or.,..._ ___ , 199', by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock, AR 72201 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SC DISTRICT NO. 1 * * * * * EXECUTED this If day of 9' I , 19911 by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: ALLEN LAW FIRM A Professional Corporation 1200 Worthen Bank Bldg. Little Rock, AR 72201 By 9(~~@4___,_ H. William Allen One of its Attorneys ARKANSAS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION , Board of Dire * * * * * EXECUTED this ___ day of ______ , 1990 by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: (NAACP) LEGAL AND EDUCATIONAL DEFENSE FUND, INC. By.,..,.... _____ ...,..,.._.....,.....-____ _ Norman J. Chachkin One of its Attorneys and THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS BRDycfas~s Re#prsen~tati By\u0026lt;i)O--k-gJ~ President, Little Rock, Arkansas Branch of NAAC JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 S. Broadway Litt Ro 4 By.........,.,L,t.'!.,l.,L.~::!\n'.,\n_..:.:..:...!:..:.::::~~--===:::::::. J 0 its Attorneys * * * * * EXECUTED thisa{'n.lday o~.,) C , 1991 by: WITNESSED AND APPROVED: KNIGHT INTERVENORS MITCHELL \u0026amp; ROACHELL L t~ ~- ock, ~ 72201 ltt:W. Third B  1._), ~ \\...l.__ Richard w. Roachell One of its Attorneys - 1997-98 ENROLLMENT AND RACIAL BALANCE IN THE PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS January 30, 1998 - Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Little Rock, Arkansas AnnS. Brown Federal Monitor Melissa R. Guldin Polly Ramer Associate Monitor Office Manager - EXHIBIT ' 2 fJ, JI.Ii 1997-98 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Pulaski County Special School District Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................... 1 Plan Provisions and Findings ...... . .. . .... . ............ . ....... .. ..... . ........ 5 Pulaski County Special School District ............. . ......... .. ........ .. .. . 5 Elementary Schools .............................................. 5 Secondary Schools .................................. ... .......... 7 Schools with Specialty Programs .. .......... . ..... .. ..... ..... . .. ... 8 Interdistrict Schools ............................................. 10 All PCSSD Schools ............................................. 11 Summary and Conclusions ...... ... ... . ... . ............. . ........ . ............ 12 School Enrollment Charts .................................................... 14 Little Rock School District .... ................ . ... . ... . ............ .. .. C-1 Enrollment by Organizational Level ...... . .............. . ..... .. . . C-10 Stipulation Magnet Schools . ...... .. .... . .................... ... C-12 Incentive Schools . ......... . ...... . ...... ... .. . ......... .. .... C-14 Area Schools ................................................ C-16 Schools with Magnet Programs ................ ... ........ . ... . .. C-22 Kindergarten Classes Located at High Schools .......... . ..... .. ... .. C-23 Early Childhood Programs ...................................... C-24 Enrollment to Capacity Comparison ............................... C-27 Pulaski County Special School District .... . ...... . ...... . . . .............. C-28 Enrollment by Organizational Levels . . .. .. . ....... .. . .. .... ... .. . .. C-35 Schools with Specialty Programs .. . .... .. .... . .. .. . . ............. C-37 Four-Year-Old Programs . ... ... .... .. ...... . ...... .. .... . . .. ... C-38 Enrollment to Capacity Comparison .. . ... . .. . . . . .. ... .. ....... . ... C-39 North Little Rock School District .. . .......... . .... . . . .. . .... ... ...... .. C-40 Enrollment by Organizational Levels . . ...... . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . .... .. C-46 Four-Year-Old Programs ... . ... . .. . .. . ...... . ......... . .. .. .... C-48 Enrollment to Capacity Comparison .. . ...... . ....... .... . . .. .... .. C-49 Imerdistrict Schools . . ...... .. .... ... .. . . . ... . .. . .. ..... .. .. . . . .. . . . . C-50 Countywide Totals . . . .. .. .. . .. ... . ... . .... .. .. . .. .. . .. . . .. . . .. . ..... C-52 Organizational Levels . . .. . .. . . . ... . .. . .... ... . .. .. .. . . .... . . . . . C-52 Enrollment Totals . . .. . . .... . .. . ............ .. . . ... . .. . .. . . . . . . C-54 INTRODUCTION The Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM), an arm of the United States District Court, prepared this report. ODM ass~ts the Court in monitoring the compliance of the three Pulaski County school districts with court orders and the desegregation plans that form the substance of their settlement agreements. Purpose, Scope, and Background For several years, ODM has published an annual report on the enrollment and racial balance of the schools in the three Pulaski County districts. However, due to circumstances explained below, this year for the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) alone have we assessed enrollment and racial balance in relation to the racial balance guidelines found in the desegregation plans. 1 Nevertheless, we again list the student enrollment and racial balance of the schools in all three districts in this year's report, because enrollment and racial balance affect the districts' participation in the two programs that promote interdistrict student transfers: the magnet schools and the M-to-M (majority-to-minority) interdistrict transfer program. In an Order dated September 18, 1995, the District Court withdrew its monitoring and supervision of the North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) in the area of student assignments. As a result, our findings do not include an assessment of enrollment or racial balance in NLRSD schools in relation to any type of desegregation plan guidelines. However, NLRSD's participation in the interdistrict magnet school and M-to-M transfer programs is affected by its enrollment and racial balance: therefore, we have included NLRSD enrollment and racial balance data in the School Enrollment Charts section. On December 6, 1996, the Little Rock School District (LRSD) petitioned the District Court to seek a respite from court monitoring while the district worked on modifications to its desegregation plan. On December 27, 1996, the Court granted LRSD's request for a monitoring moratorium. During that moratorium period, the district developed a revised desegregation and education plan and submitted it to the court in a filing dated September 26, 1997. In that same filing, the district asked that ODM continue to refrain from monitoring until after the Court ruled on the proposed new plan. In its Order of October 23, 1997, the District Court ruled that \"the hiatus from ODM monitoring will continue until this Court rules on the LRSD motion ... \" Therefore, our findings for 1997-98 do not include an assessment of enrollment or racial balance in LRSD schools. Yet, as with the NLRSD, the LRSD's participation in the interdistrict magnet and M-to-M programs is affected by its enrollment and racial balance, so we have included the LRSD enrollment and racial balance data in the section containing the School Enrollment Charts. Although this report focuses on the PCSSD and the 1997-98 school year, we have included enrollment information dating back to 1988-89, when the parties initially reached their settlement agreement. Looking at figures over the past ten academic years enables us to assess long-term trends 1While the six stipulation (original) magnet schools operate in the Little Rock School District, they serve students in all three districts\ntherefoce, we have included one chart showing that these schools meet the racial balance guidelines found in the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan. Page 1 and to draw some conclusions about what those trends indicate about enrollment and the balance of the races in individual schools, as well as the district as a whole. - The PCSSD Desegregation Plan recognizes only two racial designations, black students and white students. The plan includes provisions that set goals for balancing the enrollment of these two racial groups within each school Except for interdistrict schools, which have plan-specified guidelines that are static, these goals are based on the percentage of black students enrolled districtwide by organizational levels. Every year racial balance is assessed for each school based on the district's racial balance at each organization level for that year. The Interdistrict Desegregation Plan sets standards for racial balance at interdistrict schools that are different from those for other schools.2 Due to the unique standards set for these types of schools, this report examines interdistrict schools in a separate section. Racial Balance Calculations The PCSSD Desegregation Plan includes guidelines that set racial balance goals for individual schools. The plan set 20% as the minimum black enrollment for PCSSD schools. The maximum black enrollment at all organizational levels is based on a variance of 25% from the annual percentage of black enrollment at each of the two organizational levels (elementary and secondary). Using these guidelines, we derived a mathematical formula to calculate the targeted maximum percentage for black enrollment at PCSSD schools: For example, for the 1997-98 school year, the PCSSD has a districtwide elementary student population that is 33% black. The allowable variance in racial balance is calculated by multiplying that 33% by 25% (.33 X. 25 = .0825), then adding the product (rounded to 8%) to the total elementary black proportion of 33% (33% + 8% = 41 % ) to establish the maximum black enrollment of 41 % in elementary schools. The type of mathematical operation outlined above can be used to calculate the maximum range of racial balance targeted for each PCSSD school (unless the range is defined by specific plan provisions, such as those governing the interdistrict schools). It is important to remember that the calculations used to define the maximum are based on the percentage of black enrollment, an understanding that the parties reached among themselves. If the enrollment figures for any other racial group are substituted for the black percentage, the results will incorrectly define the target range. Because the plan-prescribed formula used to calculate the targeted racial balance is tied to the district's black enrollment for that particular year, it is not possible to uniformly compare racial balance compliance from year to year without linking a given year's enrollment to that year's acceptable range. Since the target range for racial balance may vary somewhat from one year to the next as districtwide black enrollment fluctuates, it is possible that, due to a change in the district's overall racial balance, a school that was out of compliance one year could have an identical enrollment the following year and yet be within an acceptable range. 2Clinton and Crystal Hill in the PCSSD are called magnet schools, but the desegregation plans provide for them to operate as interdistrict schools. Regardless of whether or not they carry a magnet designation, all interdistrict schools are required to meet the plan-prescribed racial balance guidelines for interdistrict schools. Page 2 As previously noted, the racial balance goals for some PCSSD schools are not determined by any type of formula or plan-prescribed floor. The Interdistrict Desegregation Plan sets specific minimum and maximum racial balance guidelines for all interdistrict schools. Although the desegregation plan specifies a minimum black enrollment for PCSSD schools, certain provisions of an agreement among the parties (called the Joshua Agreement) can possibly raise the PCSSD minimum and potentially alter the maximum as well. Information Sources October I student enrollment figures for the last nine years fonn the basis for this report. The Arkansas Department of Education requires school districts to file a report each fall that reflects the number of children enrolled on October 1 (or the school day closest to that date). Although the enrollment at any school may fluctuate somewhat during the academic year, the October 1 figures remain the basic student tally for each school. In order to make uniform year-to-year comparisons, we have generated enrollment charts that are based on the reported October 1 data. The school districts furnished all the data upon which we based this report. The accuracy and completeness of our figures depend on the reliability of the infonnation reported by each district. Throughout this document, we have rounded all percentages to the nearest whole number. Although the desegregation plans deal only with two racial designations (black students and white students), the districts provided statistical information about students who are of racial or ethnic groups other than black and white (such as Asian or Hispanic). The enrollment charts count these children in a separate category designated as \"other.\" However, these students of other races are counted along with the white students in statistical totals and comparisons in order for the report to remain consistent with the two racial categories identified in the desegregation plans. Report Organization 1bis report is divided into three sections. The first section includes the relevant desegregation plan provisions and our findings regarding the extent to which the PCSSD is meeting those requirements. Each plan provision has been summarized and referenced to its source by page number in the April 1992 PCSSD Desegregation Plan (PCSSD Plan) or the April 1992 Interdistrict Plan (Interdis. Plan). We have also made reference to a document, called the Joshua Agreement, which is among the agreements the parties have reached. Our findings deal with both the enrollment and racial balance of the PCSSD schools. Since the racial balance at each school is a product of its enrollment, the findings on enrollment precede those on racial proportions. The second section contains a summary of the findings and our conclusions about them. The third section, School Enrollment Charts, consists of a series of charts that depict enrollment data. Some of the charted statistical information is further subdivided into school organizational levels. As we assembled the information for this report we encountered data dealing with school capacities and schools that have specialty or early childhood programs, which are features designed to promote desegregation. While such infonnation does not relate directly to the purpose of our report, we Page 3 believe these figures are enlightening. Therefore, we have included charts that depict specialized enrollment data and charts that compare each school's capacity to its enrollment. - The charts in the section reflect the ten-year history of enrollment and racial balance at each school. As explained earlier, neither the NLRSD nor the LRSD are currently subject to monitoring in the area of student assignments: however, the School Enrollment Charts section organizes enrollment data from these two districts because enrollment and racial balance in all the districts remains a factor in interdistrict student transfers. We organized the charts by district, grouping the information that pertains to a single district. The last section ends with graphs that display interdistrict and countywide enrollment by race. Page 4 PLAN PROVISIONS AND FINDINGS PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Elementary Schools (Corresponding charts are on pages C-28 through C-31 .) Plan Provisions PCSSD schools are to strive for a minimum black enrollment of 20%. Bayou Meto Elementary school is exempt due to its remote location. (PCSSD Plan, pg. 72) The goal of the plan is to achieve a minimum black student enrollment of 20% by the end of six years in all PCSSD schools. By the end of the implementation period, all PCS SD schools should be within the range of plus or minus 25% of the then prevailing districtwide average of blacks by organizational level. (PCSSD Plan, pg. 84, incorporating the Joshua Agreement, page 9) Enrollment Findings  The 1997-98 elementary enrollment of 10,832 is the lowest number recorded for the PCSSD in ten years.  Between 1996-97 and 1997-98, the PCS SD has lost 445 ( 4%) of its elementary students. 3 - The number of black elementary students has declined by 72 (2% ). - The number of white elementary students has decreased by 373 (5% ).  Between 1996-97 and 1997-98, 16 of the 25 elementary schools experienced a decrease in their total enrollment: Adkins has lost 29 students (9%)\nBaker 2 (1%)\nBayou Meto 14 (2%): Cato 13 (2%): College Station 34 (11 %)\nCrystal Hill 29 (4%)\nDupree 68 (16%)\nHarris 27 (9%)\nJacksonville 139 (19%)\nLandmark 42 (8%)\nLawson 13 (4%)\nPinewood 83 (15%)\nScott 10 (8%)\nSherwood 35 (8%)\nSylvan Hills 9 (2%)\nand Tolleson 36 (7%). At Adkins, Bayou Meto, Dupree, Harris, Jacksonville Elemen.tary, and Pinewood, the enrollment decline was at least partly due to the relocation of sixth graders to Jacksonville Middle School, a change which occurred during the grade-level reorganization that involved those schools for 1997-98. (See footnote 3.)  Between 1996-97 and 1997-98, nine PCSSD elementary schools have shown enrollment increases: Arnold Drive has grown by 10 students (3%)\nBates 2 (less than .5%)\nClinton 8 (1%)\nFuller 18 (5%)\nOak Grove 10 (2%)\nOakbrooke 15 (3%)\nPine Forest 34 (7%)\nRobinson 21 (5%)\nand Taylor 20 (5%). 3Some of the decrease in elementary enrollment that occurred between 1996-97 and 1997-98 was due to the district's reorganizatioo of the Jacksooville junior highs. Jacksooville Junior High South (which previously held grades 7-9) was recoofigured to house grades 8 and 9\nJacksooville Junior High North (which also previously held grades 7-9) was renamed Jacksooville Middle School and began serving grades 6 and 7. Sixth graders were moved from Adkins, Bayou Meto, Dupree, Harris, Jacksonville Elementary, Pinewood, and Taylor to Jacksonville Middle School. This movement resulted in a population shift from the elementary level to the secondary level because some sixth graders, who had previously been counted as elementary students, were counted as secondary students beginning in 1997-98. According to the district, Jacksonville Middle School had 351 sixth graders in 1997-98. Calculations show that the 351 students that were moved out of the elementary school category for 1997-98 account for 79% of the 445- student decline in elementary population from the previous year. Page 5   Since 1988-89, the district has lost 1,421 (12%) of its elementary students. - Significant losses have occurred at 17 schools: Adkins lost l03 students (279c ): Bates 277 (37%): Cato 105 (17%): Dupree 118 (24%): Fuller 217 (36%): Hanis 411 (60%): Jacksonville 207 (26%): Landmark 165 (26%): Lawson 75 (21 %)\nOak Grove 124 (22%): Oakbrooke 193 (29%): Pine Forest 106 (18%): Pinewood 217 (32%): Robinson 71 (15%): Scott 96 (45%)\nSherwood 185 (33%): and Sylvan Hills 323 (44%). - Two schools have shown less significant enrollment declines: Taylor lost 24 students (5%) and Tolleson lost 47 (9%).  Enrollment has risen in four schools since 1988-89: College Station has shown a significant increase of lO 1 students (54% ). The other three schools have much smaller increases: Arnold Drive added 20 students (5%), Baker lO (3%), and Bayou Meto 16 (3%). Racial Balance Findings To detennine the upper end of the target range for racial balance in the PCSSD elementary schools, we used a mathematical formula based on the desegregation plan and the Joshua Agreement. The 1997-98 enrollment in PCSSD elementary schools is 33% black. Using that figure as the basis for calculations. the maximum black percentage at any PCSSD elementary school this year should be 41 %. Since the desegregation plan specifies 20% black enrollment as the minimum for all schools, the racial balance range for 1997-98 is 20% to 41% black.  In 1997-98, ten of the 25 PCSSD elementary schools (including the three interdistrict schools) have fallen outside the target for racial balance, which is two more than the eight elementary schools that failed to meet the racial balance goals last year.  The enrollment at Baker (an interdistrict school which has a minimum goal of 40% black enrollment) is 21 % black, which is 19 percentage points below the minimum for interdistrict schools. During the last ten years, Baker has never come close to achieving the minimum goal\nmoreover, progress toward that goal has continually declined for the last three years.  At 14% black in 1997-98, Lawson has fallen well below the minimum goal of 20% black. Since last year, Lawson has dropped two additional percentage points away from the minimum\nsince 1994-95 (the one year Lawson was within the range), it has fallen nine percentage points.  This year, Pine Forest (which had been within range the last two years) is below the minimum guideline. The school has failed to meet the minimum target for black enrollment for six of the last ten years.  Of the seven elementary schools that exceed the maximum range of 41 % black enrollment, four are located in the southeast sector of the PCSSD and three are located north of the Arkansas River. - Although within range last year, College Station, at 43% black, is above the targeted range. The school has been above the maximum range for eight of the last ten years. - Although within range for the last five years, Scott, at 43% black, moved above the targeted range this year. The school has been above the range for four of the last ten years. - Bates, Fuller, and Landmark have all been outside the target range for the last ten years. This year, Bates exceeds the target range by 15 percentage points, Fuller by 19 points, and Landmark by 4 points. Since 1996-97, enrollment at each of these schools has moved farther above the target range. - At 53% black, Harris, which has exceeded the target for black enrollment for the seventh consecutive year, is 12 percentage points above the goal. Page 6 - At 46% black, which is five percentage points above the goal and four points higher than last year, Jacksonville continues to exceed the target range. This is the third consecutive year that the school has missed the target range.  Although above the targeted range last year, Taylor is within the range this year. Secondary Schools (Corresponding charts are on pages C-31 through C-32.) Plan Provisions PCSSD schools are to strive for a minimum black enrollment of 20%. Bayou Meto Elementary school is exempt due to its remote location. (PCSSD Plan, pg. 72) The goal of the plan is to achieve a minimum black student enrollment of 20% by the end of six years in all PCSSD schools. By the end of the implementation period, all PCS SD schools should be within the range of plus or minus 25% of the then prevailing districtwide average of blacks by organizational level (PCSSD Plan, pg. 84, incorporating the Joshua Agreement, page 9) Enrollment Findings  In 1997-98, for the third consecutive year, PCSSD's total secondary enrollment has increased over the pervious year. The 1997-98 enrollment of9,192 has risen by 2%, or 174 students (13 black and 161 white), over the number recorded in 1996-97.4  Six of the twelve secondary schools have posted enrollment increases between 1996-97 and 1997- 98: Fuller Junior, Jacksonville Middle (previously Jacksonville South), Jacksonville Junior (previously Jacksonville North), Jacksonville High, North Pulaski High, and Robinson Junior. - The largest increases occurred at Jacksonville Junior (246 students or 47%) and at Jacksonville Middle (88 students or 13%) and are due to the reorganization of the Jacksonville junior high schools. (See footnote 4.) - All other increases in student enrollment were much more modest: Fuller Junior High (18 students or 2%)\nJacksonville High (1 student)\nNorth Pulaski High (34 students or 4%)\nand Robinson Junior High (24 students or 6%). 4Some of the increase in secondary enrollment that occurred between 1996-97 and 1997-98 was due to the district's reorganizatioo of the Jacksonvillejunioc highs. Jacksooville Junior High South (which previously held grades 7-9) was recoofigured to hoose grades 8 and 9\nJacksonville Junior High North (which also previously held grades 7-9) was renamed Jacksooville Middle School and began serving grades 6 and 7. Sixth graders were moved from Adkins, Bayou Meto, Dupree, Harris, Jacksonville Elementary, Pinewood, and Taylor to Jacksonville Middle School. This movement resulted in a population shift from the elementary level to the secondary level because some sixth graders, who bad previously been counted as elementary students, were counted as secondary students beginning in 1997-98. Acccrding to the district. Jacksonville Middle School bas 351 sixth graders in 1997-98. While calculations show that moving those 351 sixth graders into a secondary school category for 1997-98 increased the secondary count by 174 students, enrollment in the secondary level actually deaeased, when thooe students are subtracted, by 177 students from the previous year. Page 7  Between 1996-97 and 1997-98, five schools have shown a decrease in overall enrollment: Mills High (-70 or 8%)\nNorthwood Junior High (-87 or 9%): Oak Grove Junior and Senior High (-39 or 4%)\nRobinson High (-16 or 4%)\nand Sylvan Hills High (-25 or 3%). - The 70 student decline at Mills this year nearly offsets the enrollment gain of 84 students recorded in 1996-97. - Since 1995-96, Northwood Junior High has lost 152 students (15%). - The current enrollment of 785 at Sylvan Hills High School is a ten-year low.  Between 1988-89 and 1997-98, enrollment has fallen in nine of the twelve secondary schools: Northwood, Robinson, and Sylvan Hills Junior Highs\nOak Grove Junior and Senior High: and Jacksonville, Mills, North Pulaski, Robinson, and Sylvan Hills High Schools. Racial Balance Findings In order to determine the upper end of the target range for racial balance in the PCS SD secondary schools, we used a mathematical formula based on the desegregation plan and the Joshua Agreement. The 1997-98 enrollment in the PCSSD secondary schools is 32% black. Using that figure as the basis for calculations, the maximum black percentage at any PCSSD secondary school this year should be 40%. Since the desegregation plan specifies 20% as the minimum black enrollment for all schools, the racial balance range for 1997-98 is 20% to 40% black.  Both Fuller Junior High and Mills High have remained above the target range for each of the last ten years. At 44% black, Fuller Junior High is four points beyond the maximum target\nand Mills, at 48% black, is eight points beyond the maximum goal. - The percentage of black students attending Fuller Junior High has remained fairly stable during the last ten years, ranging from 43% in 1993-94 to 49% in 1995-96. - The racial balance at Mills High has been constant at 48% black over the last five academic years, although the enrollment has increased by 34% during that same time period.  No PCSSD secondary schools have fallen below the minimum of 20% black enrollment during the past seven years. In 1988-89, five secondary schools had student populations that were less than 20% black. Schools with Specialty Programs (A corresponding chart is on page C-37) As early as 1988-89 in some schools, the PCSSD began offering specialty programs as a means for promoting voluntary desegregation. Eight schools have offered some type of specialty program, and some schools offer multiple programs. Schools which have (or once had) specialty programs are Bates, College Station, Fuller, and Landmark Elementary Schools\nFuller Junior High School\nand Jacksonville, Mills, and Sylvan Hills High Schools. At the end of 1994-95, the PCSSD discontinued the Math and Science Together (MAST) specialty program it had offered at Bates. Since dropping MAST, the district has not instituted any other specialty program at Bates. Plan Provision In an attempt to further promote desegregation within PCSSD, the district continues to explore the implementation of certain intradistrict specialty programs. (PCSSD Plan, pg. 82) Page 8 Enrollment Findings  Six of the eight PCSSD schools that offer (or have offered) specialty programs have experienced a slide in total enrollment since the school began a specialty program. - Between 1990-91 (the year the specialty program began) and 1997-98, Bates' enrollment has shrunk by 172 students (27% ). Bates began experiencing a significant decrease in enrollment in 1992-93 and suffered a 12% decline in 1993-94 and another 12% drop after the school's specialty program was discontinued at the close of 1994-95. - Between 1988-89 (the year the specialty program began) and 1997-98, Fuller Elementary's enrollment has decreased by 217 students (36% ). - Landmark's enrollment has declined by 104 students (18%) between 1990-91 (the year the specialty program began) and 1997-98. The 1997-98 enrollment is presently the lowest recorded in the last ten years. - Jacksonville High has lost 207 students (17%) between 1988-89 (the year the specialty program began) and 1997-98. Mills' enrollment has decreased by 19 students (2%) between 1988-89 (the year the specialty program began) and 1997-98. However, in 1994-95 the district added two more specialty programs and enrollment began to climb. Between 1993-94 (the year before the addition of the two specialty programs) and 1997-98, enrollment has increased by 195 students (34% ). Nevertheless, the current enrollment of 766 represents a loss of 70 students since last school year. - Enrollment at Sylvan Hills High has decreased by 116 students (13%) between 1991-92 (the year the specialty program began) and 1997-98. The current enrollment of 785 is the lowest number recorded in the past ten years.  Enrollment at College Station was 188 students in 1988-89: however, that number jumped 29% (54 students) when the specialty programs were added in 1989-90. Enrollment continued to increase through 1992-93, and has fluctuated each year since. The current enrollment of 289 is near the average enrollment over the last ten years.  With the exception of 1990-91, enrollment at Fuller Junior increased between 1988-89 and 1993- 94. For the next three years (1994-95 through 1996-97), enrollment declined. In 1997-98 enrollment has risen for the first time in four years. The current enrollment of 861 represents an increase of 18 students since 1996-97 and 34 more students than were recorded in 1988-89. Racial Balance Findings  In 1997-98, six of the eight schools that have offered specialty programs exceed the target range for black enrollment\nonly Jacksonville High and Sylvan Hills High are within the range.  Bates, Fuller Elementary, Landmark, Fuller Junior High, and Mills have exceeded the target range for ten consecutive years.  Fuller Elementary, which has an enrollment that is 60% black, falls furthest from the district's target range for racial balance.  Bates, which has 56% black students, remains far from the district's goal for racial balance. Despite the racial imbalance and the constantly shrinking enrollment, the district has not put in place a new specialty program to replace MAST, which was dropped after 1994-95.  At 43% black, College Station falls just outside the target range. Although the school has met the goal for racial balance only twice within the last ten years (one of which was last year), since the addition of the specialty program, racial balance at the school has remained close to the target. Page 9  While both remain outside the target range for racial balance, the racial ratios at Fuller Junior High and Mills High have remained fairly stable. - Mills has a student population that has held steady at 48% black for the last five years. - Fuller Junior High's current enrollment is 44'k black, which is one percentage point lower than that recorded in 1988-89.  Sylvan Hills High, which once had an enrollment with less than 20'k black students, has been within the target range for the last eight years. - The district's addition of two specialty programs in 1991-92 had no immediate effect on Sylvan Hills' racial balance. However, since 1993-94 (when the Teachers of Tomorrow clubs grew into the Teachers of Tomorrow Academy, a full-fledged academic program with specialized courses) Sylvan Hills High has moved closer to the districtwide average for black and white enrollment. INTERDISTRICT SCHOOLS (Corresponding charts are on page C-50 through C-51) Three elementary interdistrict schools are located in the PCSSD: Baker. Clinton. and Crystal Hill. Clinton (which opened for 1994-95) and Crystal Hill (which opened for 1992-93) lrere built expressly to serve as interdistrict schools. Baker was designated as an interdistrict school in 1989- 90\nbefore that designation, it did not offer any special themes or enhancements. The interdistrict schools were designed to promote desegregation by attracting M-to-M ( majorityto- minority) interdistrict transfer students. The Settlement Agreement provides that when a student transfers from a district in which his race is in the majority to a district in which his race is in the minority, the State of Arkansas v..ill reimburse the receiving district for the cost of educating the Mto- M transfer student. The state also provides a financial incentive to the sending district and pays for all costs associated v..ith transporting M-to-M students. While each of the interdistrict schools draws students from a nearby attendance zone, the district must recruit M-to-M students along with intradistrict transfer students to provide racial balance and to help fill the schools to capacity. School capacity is a product of calculations based on a number of factors such as school size, the number of classrooms, recommended class sizes, and the types of courses offered. Plan Provisions The districts will establish interdistrict schools with a ratio of between 60 percent and 40 percent of either race with the ideal goal to be 50 percent black and 50 percent white. (Interdis. Plan, pg. 3) Enrollment Findings  Baker's student population has remained stable over the last three years, varying from last year's enrollment by only two fewer students.  Increasing by eight students this year, enrollment at Clinton continues a three-year increase.  Enrollment at Crystal Hill continues a three-year decline with the loss of 29 students in 1997-98. Page 10  Current enrollment levels at the PCSSD interdistrict elementary schools are high but not at capacity: - Baker, which is filled to 96% of capacity, has only 14 empty seats. - Clinton is filled to 90% of capacity and has 86 seats available. - Crystal Hill is at 91 % of capacity and has 71 unfilled seats.  Collectively, the PCSSD interdistrict schools have 171 empty seats this year, while last year the number of seats available at these schools was 113. Thus, the PCSSD interdistrict schools have 58 more empty seats than they did last year. Racial Balance Findings  Baker is the only PCSSD interdistrict school ever to fall below the minimum target of 40% black enrollment. - Since 1995-96, Baker's black population has steadily dropped, from 27% to 24% to 21 % . - In its nine years as an interdistrict school, Baker has never come close to meeting the minimum goal for black enrollment and currently has the lowest percentage of black students since it became an interdistrict school in 1989-90.  Each year since their openings, Clinton and Crystal Hill have conformed to the racial balance goals. - This year, both schools are within one percentage point of the ideal racial balance for an interdistrict enrollment, which the Interdistrict Plan designates as 50% black and 50% white. All PCSSD Schools (Corresponding charts are on pages C-33 and C-39.) The findings below pertain to the total districtwide enrollment in the PCSSD from 1988-89 to 1997- 98.  PCSSD's total 1997-98 enrollment of20,024 is the lowest recorded in the last ten years.  Between 1996-97 and 1997-98, the total PCSSD black enrollment decreased by 59 (1 %) and the white enrollment decreased by 212 students (2%) for a total loss of 271 students ( 1 % ).  Although black enrollment has decreased since last year, it has risen by 1,082 students (20%) since 1988-89\nduring that same time period, the number of white students has dropped by 2,929 (18% ), for a districtwide net loss of 1,847 students (8%) over the last ten years.  The proportion of the district's enrollment comprised of black students has increased from 25% in 1988-89 to 33% in 1997-98.  The total 1997-98 enrollment of the PCSSD constitutes only 83% of the district's total school capacity. Page 11 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The PCSSD Desegregation Plan and the Interdistrict Plan set goals and guidelines for the racial balance of student enrollment in the individual schools. While these targets are not rigid quotas, the district nevertheless agreed to strive to meet these self-imposed goals. Guidelines for maximum black enrollment in all PCSSD schools, except the three interdistrict schools, are based on a mathematical formula that adjusts some of the enrollment requirements as the racial make-up of the student population shifts from year to year. Over the last ten years, the proportion of total PCSSD enrollment comprised by black students has grown steadily as black students have entered the district and white students have left it. While the adjustable upper range for racial balance allows the majority of PCSSD schools to meet the racial balance goals set in the desegregation plans, the district has several schools that lack sufficient black population for true desegregation. The PCSSD Desegregation Plan and the Joshua Agreement set 20% as the absolute minimum for black enrollment This year, Lawson and Pine Forest elementaries (in addition to Bayou Meta, which is exempt from the 20% target) fall short of that goal Several other PCSSD elementary schools have enrollments that perennially hover near the minimum for racial balance. Baker, one of the district's three interdistrict schools, has a current enrollment that is only 21 % black. This figure sharply contrasts with the 40% minimum black enrollment that is targeted for all interdistrict schools. In its nine years as an interdistrict school Baker has never come close to meeting the minimum goal for black enrollment As a matter of fact, this year the enrollment at Baker is perilously close to slipping below the 20% minimum set by the plan for all PCSSD schools. Nine PCSSD schools are beyond the targeted maximum for black enrollment: College Station, Scott, Bates, Fuller, Landmark, Harris, and Jacksonville Elementary Schools\nFuller Junior High\nand Mills High. Five of these nine schools have exceeded the target range for the last ten years: Bates, Fuller, and Landmark Elementary Schools\nFuller Junior High School\nand Mills High School While the majority of the district's schools fall within the plan-prescribed guidelines, the PCSSD has made little progress in addressing those schools that have persistent racial imbalance in their enrollments. In addition to achieving the desired balance at each school, the district must also be concerned with maintaining or increasing the total number of students attending its schools. The number of students enrolled determines the amount of state funding received and also affects many other areas of school and district operations, such as staffing levels and course offerings. Also, enrollment is often used as a barometer of community support for a school or the school district as a whole. If a particular school is losing students, it could indicate a decline in the level of community satisfaction with that school. By the same token, if total school district enrollment is falling, most observers would conclude that support for the local public schools is eroding. A serious issue facing the PCSSD is its continued loss of students. The reorganization of the Jacksonville junior high schools, which resulted in moving many sixth graders from the elementary roster to the secondary roll, makes enrollment comparisons between 1996-97 and 1997-98 a little less exact. Nevertheless, it is clear that the district has lost students at both the elementary and secondary level. Page 12 The economic impact of enrolling M-to-M students can be considerable. While the PCSSD interdistrict schools are filled to 91 % of their capacity, the schools have 171 empty seats. If all the seats at the interdistrict schools that were available for transfer students could be filled with M-to-M students, both the sending and the receiving district would receive significant financial gains. In 1995-96, the PCSSD registered a slight increase in enrollment, and it appeared that the district might have turned the tide of declining enrollment. But a substantial downturn in student population in 1996-97 was followed by more losses in 1997-98. The district's current enrollment represents a ten-year low. If enrollment continues to fall, the district will find itself confronted with perpetual financial shortfalls and the myriad of other difficulties that result from significantly declining enrollment. District leaders need to detennine the various causes underlying the loss of students and take steps to stanch the flow of children out of the district. The very financial and educational viability of the district is at stake. Page 13 SCHOOL ENROLLMENT CHARTS This section of the report is organized by school district in alphabetical order. The enrollment charts for each district are further divided by school organizational level: all elementary schools are grouped together as are junior high and senior high schools. Separate charts focusing on schools with special requirements (interdistrict schools and schools with specialty programs) are also included. Each district's enrollment grand total is the sum of all its schools at all organizational levels. Every district has some schools that are difficult to categorize. For example, the alternative schools, which seek to provide a learning environment specially structured to meet the needs of at-risk youth, do not fit in the category of specialty schools as defined by the desegregation plans. Thus we have grouped these schools with the non-specialty schools. This section of the report also includes some charts depicting specialized enrollment data (such as the four-year-old program) and school capacities. On the charts, we used color highlighting to mark the years that each school has been outside the racial balance guidelines as those guidelines would have been defined for that year. Blue highlighting irxlicates that the proportion of black students is above the maximum guideline in the desegregation plan: yellow highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is below the minimum. No highlighting appears for the schools in NLRSD nor for the LRSD in the 1997-98 school year. Page 14 I  I LRSD .. School 88-89 Elem Black 202 ~ White 77 other Total 279 %Blk 72 Bale Elem Black 297 ( cl'ea school) White 117 Other Total 414 %Blk 72 Baseline Elem Black 292 (ar88 school) White 108 other Total 400 %Blk 73 Booker Elem Black 355 (magnet school) White 292 Other Total 647 %Blk 55 ae Black 278 White 169 other Total 447 %81k 62 carver Elem Black 222 (magnet school) White 224 Other Total 446 %Blk 50 Chicot Elem Black. 363 (area school) White:. 197 Other Total .. 560 %Blk 65 Cloverdale Elem Black 281 (area school) White 165 Other Total 446 %81k 63 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT TEN YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON Preoared bv the Office of Des8QI \"\"\"tion Mon1tonn\u0026lt;J 89-90 ~91 91-92 92-93 93-94 180 166 161 154 132 57 56 59 48 57 0 0 0 0 0 237 222 220 202 189 76 75 73 76 70 292 302 295 248 225 88 66 60 62 68 5 7 5 11 10 385 375 360 321 303 76 81 82 77 74 282 272 258 262 265 100 91 74 74 76 7 7 5 3 2 389 370 337 339 343 72 74 77 77 77 325 346 347 345 321 280 260 275 269 265 5 8 12 7 9 610 614 634 621 595 53 56 55 56 54 292 330 286 275 263 142 121 128 111 122 8 5 6 12 12 442 456 420 398 397 66 72 68 69 66 273 327 325 329 325 308 267 271 262 263 8 9 5 7 7 589 603 601 598 595 46 54 54 55 55 .. 339 362 341 350 356 188. 180 187 177  147 4 2. 3 8 t 531 544 531 535 509. 64 67 64 65 70 294 289 304 291 304 122 98 84 71 75 3 2 4 4 7 419 389 392 366 386 70 74 78 80 79 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 133 166 185 214 44 44 32 19 0 0 2 0 177 210 219 233 75 79 84 92 214 243 266 265 87 85 94 78 8 19 15 19 309 347 375 362 69 70 71 73 245 247 241 267 77 75 56 44 4 5 5 12 326 327 302 323 75 76 80 83 305 316 313 ' 308 245 267 272 , 275 23 21 18 ' 14 573 604 603 597 53 52 52 52 254 250 236 , 235. 137 124 t03 ' 98, 17 20 32 ' 39 408 394 371 372 62 63 64 63- 309 326 311 . ' ' 312' 267 290 274 264' 12 13 19 20\" 588 629 604 . ' 596' 53 52 51 I' ' 52 344 345 364 l )  3:70 151 99: 127\n~ -~ 127 ~ ~ - 8 B 27 ,. \"t 40 . ' 500 452 518 .537 68 76 70 ) '.: ' '69 312 384 439 =:. 469 74 64 51 '.\\~ 34.. 6 5 10 - . 9 392 453 500 ' 51.2. 80 85 88 ( ' 92 Page C-1 LASO Ten Year Enrollment Comparison School 88-89 89-90 ~91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 ril-98 Dodd Elem Black 270 253 194 166 183 189 193 190 156 145 (area school) White 144 138 134 134 121 97 97 97 82 74 Other 3 3 3 0 6 8 7 4 5 Total 414 394 331 303 304 292 298 294 242 224 %Blk 65 64 59 55 60 65 65 65 64 65 Fair Park Elem Black 247 240 279 257 192 200 204 211 193 188 (area school) White 94 92 65 60 49 60 73 53 55 54 Other 0 1 3 2 3 5 6 7 6 Total 341 332 345 320 243 263 282 270 255 248 %Blk 72 72 81 80 79 76 72 78 76 76. Forest Park Elem Black 251 223 205 191 198 200 198 205 218 205, ( area school} White 172 165 1n 206 242 253 228 222 227 219' Other 4 5 5 4 5 6 8 4 6 Total 423 392 387 402 444 458 432 435 449 430' %81k 59 57 53 48 45 44  46 47 49 ' 48 Franklin Elem Black 414 364 343 428 352 300 393 400 414 427 (incentive school) White 28 72 59 71 50 40 41 24 31 31 Other 12 9 8 9 5 9 7 7 6 Total 442 448 411 507 411 345 443 431 452 ' 464 %Blk 94 81 83 84 86 87 89 93 92 :: 92 Slack 327 325 1: 293  231 225 .\nFulbright Elem 233 235 255 265 24 (area sehool) white ... 271 242 259 :,  264 . 296 : 272: 289 254 227 - 247 : Other 9 7 11 .. 9 15 18' .... 9 8 8 576\n'., 559  :.-. .-,: ,_._.- . ::, Total .,. 598\\ .,. 506 53(k '\" .., 520. 542 518' I 500\n: . 495  %Blk ,' / ::: 56,:\"/ , . . . :.: 42 :, . .. 413:' :. 55: :' 52 46: .,,, 45 ., 49. 53 \\ :~ , 48, Garland Elem Black 276 268 211 262 233 181 246 235 254 ' ~.(253, (incentive school)\n, White 23 15 18 15 17 3 9 2 6 .. .\n,6, :' :' Other 2 11 2 6 21 27 18 17 .:  12 Total 299 285 240 279 256 205 282 255 277 271 , %81k 92 94 88 94 91 88 87 92 92 93 Bllitifr ..:: ......  :i)!:1'35\n}',i~, ir 180 . \u0026gt;177 :'.::::::::_,_.\n_ _,_\n:.,_ _\n\\( Geyer Springs Elem C 15 ::a::a:a::o.~ .:':\n:: .1\u0026lt;1Ai' ~: ..., ~  i\u0026gt; '': ZiF }'' 233 ., :, 237 (area school} t 82' .:,:::  l}i:1(' 56 ,. .. . . ., ?1J)S  i/::l'! 79{ \n2y,es 1\u0026gt; 11\u0026gt;\n:\u0026gt;:, \nWfflle\ni :, .. .\u0026gt; 69i . 74 ' - 69 . ..,:\".. 69 :. ~ . other( : /,:. A ,. ....... : .: '' o:: lti\u0026gt;  \u0026lt;h , (l 1., .. ~r\n.o \u0026lt;:::,: 2 .\\j\\ f\nf ::.:\na:\n\u0026gt; . .a 1,/}:. f()' YC~ F ~--)i ,\nt 201 I',. , .. 1: ...  rotat 205 254 . i' ... 282  : aia .,.t:i:'S~ :::: [\n' s1o, ,?}: 310 .316 , %,Blk  66 66 72 71 63 72 74 75 75 ,'/ 75', Gibbs Elem Black 172 172 187 190 191 170 160 165 160\n\\t~1 (magnet school) White 163 159 140 141 134 121 121 132 146 / . 143 Other 7 6 8 11 8 12 10 6 1/.'/ / , Total 335 338 333 339 336 299 293 307 312  311 . %Blk 51 51 56 56 57 57 55 54 51  '/ 5 Page C-2 LASO Ten Year Enrollment Comparison School 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 W-98 lsh Elem Black 178 157 142 188 182 . ' school} White 7 4 9 5 . 19 after 1992-93 school year. Other 0 0 3 0 Total 197 164 146 200 187 %Blk 90 96 97 94 97 Jefferson Elem Black 272 239 237 209 204 213 218 210 207 227 (area school) White 216 237 225 270 273 287 279 285 282 . 279 Other 3 7 5 6 4 5 6 8 7 Total 488 479 469 484 483 504 502 501 497 513 %8Ik 56 50 51 43 42 42 43 42 42 44 King Elem Black 88 357 309 289 332 354 (inlJBrdiatrict school) White 6 189 227 230 279 287 Cloeed after 1988-89\na,- interastrict King opened tor Other 7 15 12 11 17 1900-94. TotaJ 94 553 551 531 622 658 %81k 94 65 56 54 53 54' Mabelvale Elem Black 373 311 321 266 278 311 340 318 308 -. 299' (area school) White 213 222 235 234 219 174 124 139 104 , 99 Other 2 3 5 3 3 10 3 6 9 Total 586 535 559 505 500 488 474 460 418 407 %Blk 64 58 57 53 56 64 72 69 74 ' 73 D81TTlOtt8em Black 298 314 323 291 275 262 241 259 277 '273 school) White 208 190 193 206 220  232 233 213 196 ' 186 Other 10 8 14 14 15 20 15 16 ' 18 Total 506 514 524 511 509- 509 494 481 489 .. .f'/7 %Blk 59 61 62 57 54 51 49 53 57 , ~7 Meado'NCliff Elem Black 312 2 252 292 306 279 305 285 ( 283: (area school) , ' White 144 162 154 174 147 127 131 93 82 , .\n59. Other 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 6 10. Total 456 432 444 427 440 434 411 400 373 332- %Blk 68 62 65 59 66 71 68 76 76 , 79 MltcheU Elem :de 220- 220 :\n. 183 285 232 215 260 250 248 \\ ' 223' (lncElntiY\u0026amp; school) Whit\u0026amp; . 41 19 24 27 28 12 8 7 12 f6' Other 0 0 0 4 3 4 0 2 3 Total 261 239 207 312 - 264 230 272 257 262 , , 242' %81k 84 92 88 91 88 93 96 97 95 / . 9Z '. Otter Creek Elem Black 207 170 180 160 143 141 154 139 132 ! t51 (area school) White 154 172 179 191 203 195 196 193 170 . - -. ,_. 168 Other 0 0 5 7 5 9 7 8 -,_ ! g ' Total 361 342 359 356 353 341 359 339 310 , 328 %Blk 57 50 50 45 41 41 43 41 43 46 Page C-3 LASO Ten Year Enrollment Comparison School 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 'R-98 Pul Heights Elem Black 226 218 211 185 198 190 197 189 245 254 (area school} White 100 87 108 151 173 197 207 207 200 20 Other 2 6 6 8 11 16 10 9 8 Total 326 307 325 342 379 398 420 406 454 464 %81k 69 71 65 54 52 48 47 47 54 55 Aightsell Elem Black 196 194 191 282 239 184 225 210 237 234 (incentive school) White 45 16 1 6 9 4 4 6 5 12 Other 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 4 3 Total 241 211 193 289 249 189 229 219 246 249 %81k 81 92 99 98 96 97 98 96 96 94 Rockefellec Elem Black 255 215 195 282 250 240 264 259 266 264 (incerrtllo6 school with a mag,et program} White 45 33 71 116 104 93 124 131 155 167 Other 2 5 5 7 7 15 16 15 ts Total 300 250 271 400 361 340 403 400 *436 +450- %Blk 85 86 72 70 69 71 66 64 61 59 Romine Elem Black 360 342 323 301 277 247 234 213 201 206 (intardistrict school) White 112 78 66 55 74 73 73 80 82 90 Other 5 3 1 10 14 16 9 21 32 Total 472 425 392 357 361 334 323 302 304 328 %81k 76 80 82 84 77 74 72 71 66 63 Stephens Elem Black 227 225 190 235 202 141 '. (incenliw school) White 6 0 12 9 7 3 Closed after Iha 1993-94- schoci yea,. Other 1 0 1 0 1 Total 233 226 202 245 209 145 %Blk 97 100 94 96 97 97 '' Terry Elem Black 307 312 289 243 238 243 234 239 231 . , 235. (area school) White 215 197 227 253 286 292 295 279 266 ' , 253, Other 4 6 16 17 26 30 18 18 ' 23. Total 522 513 522 512 541 561 559 536 515 ' 5n %8lk 59 61 55 47 44 43 42 45 45 46, ... Wakefield Elem Btack'\n. \"316 :..~\n:(. 301 -326 329- j 341 331 327 368 385 322' ., (area sci'lod) - White- - 185 ,\n_ 160 1--69 141 147 - 100: 73 C 51 38 . .. 41 Other ': .. . - 3 7 9 6 4 13 10. 13 ' . w - , _. 3.73 - Total 501 464- 502 479 500  44-7 413 .\n.: 429 436 1 %Blk 63 65 65 69 69 75 79 86 88\n.. 86 . . Washington Elem Black 510 438 480 483 451 443 422 392 352 . ..., (interdistrict school) White 8 313 356 332 260 211 210 272 247 Old Washington razed\nnew Washington opened for Other 1 11 5 7 10 33 24 44 61 ..- 1989-90. Total 519 762 841 822 721 687 656 708 l'  660 . %Blk 98 57 57 59 63 64 64 55 Page C--4 LRSD Ten Year Enrollment Comparison School 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 Watson Elem Black 297 294 347 338 332 353 340 353 394 441 ea school) White 168 160 168 126 117 89 81 84 80 46 Other 2 3 3 2 0 6 7 5 6 Total 465 456 518 467 451 442 427 444 479 493 %Blk 64 64 67 72 74 80 80 80 82 89 Western Hills Elem Black 213 196 204 190 209 215 215 208 219 222 (area school) White 119 140 131 130 124 114 95 106 92 92 Other 1 4 3 2 3 7 1 1 1 Total 332 337 339 323 335 332 317 315 312 315 %Blk 64 58 60 59 62 65 68 66 70 70 Williams Elem Black 246 255 281 273 275 257 250 264 259 248 (rnagiel school) White 229 241 218 214 218 207 214 232 226 2H} Other 5 6 8 9 8 10 12 16 12 Total 475 501 505 495 502 472 474 508 501 479 %Blk 52 51 56 55 55 54 53 52 52 52 Wilson Elem Black 289 263 298 288 265 263 254 304 294 297 (area school) White 123 134 118 105 90 87 83 72 57 53 Other 0 2 1 0 4 8 8 11 12 Total 412 397 418 394 355 354 345 384 362 362 %Blk 70 66 71 73 75 74 74 79 81 82 \nooctruff Elem Black 163 137 120 145 147 147 148 170 185 201 ee school} White 58 52 62 n 83 . 84 87 81 80 ' 81 Other 4 4 3 4 5 8. 3 3 ' 2 Total 221 193 186 225 234 236 243 254 268 284 %Blk 74 71 65 64 63 62 61 67 69 71 High School Black 87 90 98 93 109 110 104 101 72 ' 40 Kindergartens White 36 27 15 18 13 16 16 11 4 ~ ,, 1 Other 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 Total 123 119 113 111 122 127 120 115 77 41 %Blk 71 76 87 84 89 87 87 88 94 98 SubTotal - Elem Black. _ 91i84 9:489 9.435 9537 9182 9\n055 9004 9239 9.417 9402 White 4768 4579 4,740 4,971 4960 4838 4 767 4613 4,534 ,_ 4- 380' Other 127 161 175 201 251 400 333 407 475 Total 14302 1-4195 14.336 14683 14343 14144  14.171 14.185- 14.358  14,257 %Blk er, 67 66 65 64 64 64 65 66 66 Alternative - Jr_ High Black 10 The LRSD did not provide White 0 October 1 enrollment for the alternative jr h igh until Other 0 1997-98, although the Total 10 school was established ore 1997-98. %81k 100 Page C-5 LASO Ten Year Enrollment Comparison School Cloverdale Jr. High Dunbar Jr. High (interdistrict school with magnet programs) Forest Heights Jr. High Bfack White Other Tolat %Blk Black White Other Total %Blk Black White 88-89 424 288 712 60 600 141 741 81 492. 278  ~90 470 251 10 731 64 454 120 2 576 79 538 -254- 16 90-91 91-92 92-93 535 531 571 224 209  192 5 5 12 764 745 775 70 71 74 423 420 410 236 263 283 4 8 12 663 691 705 64 61 58 530 541 554 224 208 220 \" 18 ...  13 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 566 521 527 553 552 130 119- 73 70 52 5 7 9 16 18 701 647 609 639 622 81 81 87 87 89 439 468 440 451 442 251 227 279 299 291 11 12 13 25 38 701 707 732 775 771 63 66 60 I ,. 58 57 575 , ,:  565 578 485 ,. ,,\n452, .. ,. -195 .-. \u0026gt;  1-97'\" t65, 135 ' ' i Hit' ,.,,,. .. . .. 18 , \" ,,., ,, 1a\u0026gt; .,.,::16 _\n10 .... , ' 15' soa mi . .. 6T . 69 787\" ''\u0026gt; 788-.: .. k  759, ., k ',, 780\n  17 630 70 if \\ 73 f /'O cc72\nf, 76 .. 77 -~o\n: \u0026lt;.: 7:.. _ 7~/ :._: ~ -r Henderson Jr. High (includes a magnet program) 685 678 661 623 610 215 210 229 152 116 Black 614 680 672 711 / 'a62if White 340 256 211 135 ,-:,,: st( r Other 20 19 13 14 27 27 17 15\n, .  12' Total 954 956 902 859 914 915 917 792 741 //. 724 %Blk 64 71 75 83 75 74 72 79 82\n_\"/, 86  Mabelvafe.Jr. High.,. 'Black  ,325. \u0026lt;:{ 372: 1T 404 ,_.. ~ \u0026lt;r\nt,'4$. /,,i.:~ ,:\n!'\"' 417 \u0026gt; )~ ) : . 347 (( ,379 White, , 256, 8ci'. 235 ttl. 214 .\\235\" i\nt? 22a\u0026gt; ti,\u0026lt;.fl7( ,,:  1:st'., ), \u0026lt;125,~\n:J t6 ' _\n\\ 122_: Other.,,,, ir:}~:Iii/,, 21~:e\\:,.?2 ::j 1 t:iJr :f :\n.. ),':l } 1\n'i.' 'ii.:-A\u0026lt;:3, ,,::.{._, 5 (:-: :. 4  :+ora1t\n}  58:1f iif609= ,'\n:~ :J?~ :. 1('\n_ 66i .:.:' :: \"  585\u0026gt; i:t~~.: \u0026gt;\n\u0026gt; 468 _:r:)'SQ5, -, ..... ,  .. c:,,.\u0026gt;- .im1t ,::\n'.\n/si\n,.11\nAt: :tlilV\u0026amp;S. i!I .fsas: :::u ...... :t~,\n\u0026gt; t.~\\: ~1r\n11::: \\,::ci\u0026lt;\u0026lt; \u0026lt;::i ___ 1-t,- t//)~-t _.,,j Mann Jr. High (magnet school) Black 516 476 515 491 505 494 456 451 White 366 381 356 365 327 341 366 382 Other 20 15 16 17 16 23 14 ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ % Blk 59 54 58 56 59 58 54 53  :\n. ii \\ ~ 11 j =: s~ i.\ni1j~1\n,~\nr\nt:: {t :. ':\n,,\nf,,\na i: {i$ :~:  . Tbfaf.. :.L \"' r :. ,. _ 1,22.- .. ~:- :1st.- :\nt !!\u0026gt;~   .,.. .,.,. .,  ' 'f\nf ': ./,.':,~~t: I . .,,,,,., ,,, ,,,.,,, , ,,z,.,,,\",\" c' ,c:.,.':\u0026gt;:\u0026lt;'::i ,' ,,,,.,, ._., ,.,, ,, , f j\n: ,, . ,_ ,.,,, \"'.,',\n,.,.\n.\u0026gt; \\\n ' { { ', ,_-'_,.{:. % Blk, .:-.::,-,. ~ -:a:\n,,v :':::\n\"' ,\n,, t.H' :t,:':'(J\noa,, ::,,\n,-,, -.:.-:,o:\n\"'\"  .,. ,, ,:J:::IF  / / ,.--57, Southwest Jr. High Black 512 493 492 521 523 524 487 512 White 222 198 151 176 166 141 105 84 Other 9 12 7 6 14 18 16 Total 734 700 655 704 695 679 610 612 %Blk 70 70 75 74 75 77 80 84 Page C-6 I LASO Ten Year Enrollment Comparison School 88--89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 !17-98 Sub Total - Jr. High Black 3 912 3,937 4025 4112 4138 4163 4006 3.~1 3 817 3,768 White 2156 1 951 1878 1 882 1 948 1 816 1,738 1 587 1,558 1,511 Other 90 81 68 80 100 118 95 111 136 Total 6068 5978 5 984 6,062 6,166 6,079 5862 5623 5486 5,415 %Blk 64 66 67 68 67 68 68 70 70 70 Alternative - Sr. High Black 6 The sanlOI' high alternative White 0 program began in 1997-98. Other 0 Total 6 %81k 100 Central High Black 1,136 1,060 928 1,036 1,133 1,178 991 974 1,073 1,068 (includes a magnet program) White 884 720 617 640 761 618 548 542 634 724 Other 33 35 45 56 33 49 30 38 29' Total 2,020 1,813 1,580 1,721 1,950 1,829 1,588 1,546 1,745 1 821 %Blk 56 58 59 60 58 64 62 63 61 59 Fair High Black 455 507 504 534 562 580 618 638 639 612 White 449 397 353 335 310 311 276 244 168 138 Other 7 9 13 14 8 7 8 6 7 Total 904 911 866 882 886 899 901 890 813 757 %Blk 50 56 58 61 63 65 6S 72 79 81 all High Black 632 629 694 587 560 580 662 618 584 554 White 617 551 502 476 390 351 313 254 194 187 Other 12 16 19 26 27 36 39 29 43 Total 1 249 1 192 1,212 1,082 976 958 1,011 911 807 784 %Blk 51 53 57 54 57 61 65 68 72 7,1 McClellan High Black 602 634 613 640 638 648 664. 708 751 , 790. . (commuruly scl'lool wHh a mag,et prognm) White 569 439. 379 328 312 211 203 171 151 132 Other 8 11 12 16 7 10 5 8 13 Total 1.171 1..681 l 003 980 966 866 an 884 910 935 %81i 51 59 61 65 66 75 76 80 83 84 Metropolitan High Black (As a YOCalional high school which students may attend White for half a day, Metropolitm Other students are counted in the enrollment of their assigled Total high school.) %Blk ' Parkview High Black 482 434 436 446 485 443 420 429 445 464 (magiet school) White 347 354 350 373 358 315 ,. 328 373 385 418 Other 17 19 25 11 10 37 35 36 29 Total 829 805 804 844 854 768 785 837  866 911 %Blk 58 54 54 53 57 58 54 51 51 51 Page C-7 School I 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 I 95-96 96-97 97-98 Sub Total - Sr. High Black 3,307 3.264 3,174 3,243 3,378 3.429 3,355 3.367 3,492 , 3\n494 White 2,866 2.461 2,201 2.152 2,131 1,806 1,668 1,584 1,532 , ,t ,599 - \u0026lt; Other 77 90 114 123 85 139 117 117 , ,: 121 - \u0026lt; Total 6,173 5,802 5,465 5,509 5,632 5,320 5,162 5,068 5,141 . ,_ ' 5-,214 % Blk 54 56 58 59 60 64 65 66 68 ,:/_~' . 67 Sub Total- Black 7219 7,201 7,199 7,355 7,516 7,592 7,361 7,308 7,309 ,_ -'-7,262 Secondary White 5,022 4,412 4,079 4,034 4,079- 3,622 3,406 3,171 3,09-0 '-':r:n-0 Other 167  171 1.82 203 185 257 212 228 '.,:::z5-7 Total 12,241 11,780 11,449 11,571 U ,798 11,399 . 11,024 10,691 10,627 : fo,629 % Blk 59 61 63 64 64 67 67 68 69 ._ ' .. '68. Grand Total Black 16,753 16.690 16,634 16,892 16,698 16,647 16,365 16,547 16,726 16,664 White 9,790 8,991 8,819 9,005 9,039 8.460 8,173 7,784 7,624 7,490 Other 294 332 357 404 436 657 545 635 '' 732 Total 26.543 25,975 25,785 26,254 26,141 25,543 25,195 24,876 24,985 _ 2'4 886 % Blk 63 64 65 64 64 65 65 67 67 r 67 r Note: The blue and yellow highlighting in this section indicate that the school is outside the racial balance guidelines for the year. 0 Blue highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is above the maximum guideline in the desegregation plan\nyellow highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is below the minimum. However, at the time we prepared this report, . the LASO was operating under the terms of a monitoring moratorium\ntherefore, for the 1997-98 school year, we did not assess the enrollment of LASO schools in relation to racial balance guidelines. The high school enrollment totals, both individually and collective, do not include the number of students in the kindergarten classes that are located within those buildings. The high school kindergarten enrollment is included in the elementary enrollmeia totals.   Beginning with the 1994-95 school year, the enrollment for Rockefeller includes the infants, one-year-olds, two-year-olds, and _ three-year-olds. Before 1994-95, the LASO included only children in the four-year-old program through six1h grade in \"' Rockefeller's October 1 enrollment report. ... , Ii I I I I I Page C-8 , LRSD TEN YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON 30.000 25.000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 -==:::\n==:::\n==:::\n==:::\n==:::\n==:::\n==:::\n==:::\n===7 1989-90 1991-92 1993-94 1995-96 1997-98 1988-89 1990-91 1992-93 1994-95 1996-97 i iii Total  Black  White The graphs below magnify the total, black, and white enrollment shown above. The graph above is at intervals of 5,000 students\nthose below are at intervals of 500. 18.000 17,500 17,000 16,500 16,000 15,500 27,000 26,500 26,000 25,500 25,000 24,500 24,000 Black Enrollment 1 s,000-+--,---,~~~---,--r---.--r--r' Total Enrollment 11 ,000 10,500 10,000 9,500 9,000 8,500 8,000 White Enrollment PageC-9 School Elementary Junior High Senior High. Sub Total - Secondary Grand Total Page C-10 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BY ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL TEN YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON Prepared by the Office of Desegreganon Mon1twng ! 0s-a9 I 89-90 90-91 I 91-92 92-93 I 93-94 94-95 I 95-96 Black 9,447 9,489 9,435 9,537 91s2 9.055 9,004 9,239 White 4.732 4,579 4,740 4,971 4,960 4.838 4,767 4,613 Other 127 161 175 201 251 400 333 Total 14,179 14,195 14,336 14,683 14,343 14.144 14.171 14.185 %Blk 67 67 66 65 64 64 64 65 I Black 3,912 3,937 4,025 4,112 4,138 4.163 4,006 3.941 White 2.156 1,951 1,878 1,882 1,948 1.816 1,738 1,587 Other 90 81 68 80 100 118 95 Total 6,068 5,978 5.984 6,062 6.166 6.079 5,862 5.623 0 '\u0026lt;\u0026gt; Blk 64 66 67 68 67 68 68 70 Brack 3,394 3,264 3.174 3,243 3,378 3.429 3,355 3,367 White 2.902 2.461 2,201 2.152 2.131 1.806 1,668 1,584 Other Tl 90 114 123 85 139 117 Total 6,296 5,802 5,465 5,509 5,632 5.320 5,162 5,068 %Blk 54 56 58 59 60 64 65 66 Black 7,306 7,201 7,199 7,355 7,516 7.592 7,361 7,308 White 5,058 4,412 4,079 4,034 4,079 3.622 3,406 3.171 Other 167 171 182 203 185 257 212 Total 12,364 11,780 11 ,449 11,571 11 ,798 11 .399 11 ,024 10,691 %Blk 59 61 63 64 64 67 67 68 Black 16.753 16 690 16.634 16,892 16,698 16,647 16,365 16,547 White 9,790 8,991 8,819 9,005. 9039 8,460 8,173 7,784 Other 294 332 'J.57  404 436 657 545 Total 26,543 25.975 25,785 26254 26,141 25,543 25.195 24,876 %Blk 63 64\" 65 64 64 65 65 67 96-97 I 97-98 9,417 9,402 4,534 4,380 407 475 14,358 14.257 66 66 3,817 3.768 1.5s8 \\ 1.511 111 I 136 5.486 5.415 10 I 70 3,492 3,494 1,532 1.599 117 121 5,141 5,214 68 67 7,309 7,262 3.090 3,1 10 228 257 10,627 10.629 69 68 16,726 16,664 7,624 7,490 635 732 24,985 24,886 67 67 J l J I I  1 LASO ENROLLMENT BY ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL ,0.000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 Elementary Level 0 J2:==============,r 1989-90 1991-92 1993-94 1995-96 1997-96 1988-89 1990-91 1992-93 1994-95 1996-97 II Black O White Secondary Level 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 o-lc====::\n:::::====::\n:::::====-:\n,\" 1989-90 1991-92 1993-94 1995-96 1997-98 1988-89 1990-91 1992-93 1994-95 1996-97  Black  White The graphs below subdivide enrollment at the secondary level. The graphs above are at intervals of 2,000 students\nthose below are at intervals of 500. 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 Junior High Level 1,500 -J.!:=\n=::::\n==\n=::::\n==\n=::::\n==\n=::::\n==?' 11194-95  Block  White Senior High Level 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,soo.J.1::=============.r 1969-90 1991-92 1988-89 1990-91  Black  White Page C-11 School Booker Elementary Arts Magnet Carver Elementary Basic Skill\u0026amp;'Math- Science Magnet Gibbs Elementary Foreign Language/ International Studies Magnet Williams Elementary Basic Skills Magnet Mann Jr. High Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet Parkview High Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet GrandTotat ' C Black White Other Total %8Ii( Black White Other Total %Blk Black White Other Total %Blk Black White Other Total %Blk Black While Other Total %8lk Black White Other Total %Blk Black' White:  Other, Totai  STIPULATION MAGNETS TEN YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON Prepared by the Office of Desegregallon Morntonng 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 355 325 346 347 345 321 292 280 260 275 269 265 5 8 12 7 9 647 610 614 634 621 595 55 53 56 55 56 54 222 273 327 325 329 325 224 308 267 271 262 263 8 9 5 7 7 446 589 603 601 598 595 50 46 54 54 55 55 172 172 187 190 191 170 163 159 140 141 134 121 7 6 8 11 8 335 338 333 339 336 299 51 51 56 56 57 57 246 255 281 273 275 257 229 241 218 214 218 207 5 6 8 9 8 475 501 505 495 502 472 52 51 56 55 55 54 516 476 515 491 505 494 366 381 356 365 327 341 20 15 16 17 16 882 an 886 872 849 851 59 54 58 56 59 58 482 434 435 446 485 443 347 354 350 373 358 315 17 19 25 11 10 829 805 804 844 854 768 58 54 54 53 57 58 1993 1.935 2.091 2.072 2.130 2.P:10 .. -~ 1,621 1723 1 591 1.639 . 1.568 1,St.2 ~ 0 \"' 62 63 74\n62 . , .\n. -:\nA .. 3.6t4 ( 3.7a0 3,745 3785 , 31so \" a:58Ci - '\u0026lt; %Blk , 55 52: 56 55 ... 57 ): '.56 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 305 316 313 308 245 267 272  275 23 21 18 14 573 604 603 597 53 52 52 52 309 326 311 312 267 290 274 264 12 13 19 20 588 629 604 596 53 52 51 52 160 165 160 161 121 132 146 143 12 10 6 7 293 307 312 311 55 54 51 52- 250 264 259 . 2.48 214 232 226 219 10 12 16 12 474 508 501 479 53 52 52 52 456 451 443 , 446 366 382 395 392 23 14 16\n, 20 845 847 854 \" 858. 54 53 52 I ~ .1 52 .\n420 429 445 I \\. 464 328 373 385 ' t 4'1,8 \\ 37 35 36 ~  .  , 2!f 785 837 866 91'1 54 51 51 ' 51- ' , t900 1 951 1 931 ' 1..9$ ' . . :\\ 1 541 t676 1698 ' l.711 U? ,1t7\nt- 1:os ,t 111 ... .-,\\102 ~JS-558 ' 3.:732 ,- 3740 ~\n.\n.\n. . .3,752 }., ~-- 53 ' 52 ~ ,\n~ ~ 52 ~-\\., 52 Note: The blue and yellow highlighting in this section indicate that the school is outside the racial balance guidelines for the year. Blue highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is above the maximum guideline in the desegregation plan\nyellow highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is below the minimum. However, at the time we prepared this report, the LRSD was operating under the terms of a monitoring moratorium\ntherefore, for the 1997-98 school A year, we did not assess the enrollment of LRSD schools in relation to racial balance guidelines. W Page C-12 1997-98 Black Percentage in Stipulation Magnets 100 90 80 70 60 50 52 51 40 30 20 10 0 Booker Carver Gibbs Williams Mann Parkview Page 4 of the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan reads, \"The Little Rock [School] District shall continue to operate the interdistrict magnet schools established in 1987-88. Those schools shall be racially balanced to a point of between 50 percent and 55 percent black.\" At the time we prepared this report, the LRSD was operating under the terms of a monitoring moratorium, so for the 1997-98 school year, we did not assess the enrolhnent of LRSD schools in relation to racial balance guidelines. However, because the six stipulation (original) magnet schools located in the LRSD serve students from all three school districts in Pulaski County, we prepared the above graph to show that all six supulation magnets fall within the plan guidelines for racial balance. Page C-13 LH:\u0026gt;U i. ~\\..t:N 11 Vt: :\u0026gt;\\..nVvL\n:, TEN YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON Preoared by the Office of Des MorntormQ School 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 9~96 96-97 97-98 Franklin Elem Black 414 364 343 428 352 300 393 400 414 427 White 28 72 59 71 50 40 41 24 31 31 Other 12 9 8 9 5 9 7 7 Total 442 448 411 507 411 345 443 431 452 4 %Blk 94 81 83 84 86 87 89 93 92 92 Garland Elem Black 276 268 211 262 233 181 246 235 254 253 White 23 15 18 15 17 3 9 2 6 6 Other 2 11 2 6 21 27 18 17 12 Total 299 285 240 279 256 205 282 255 277 271 %Blk 92 94 88 94 91 88 87 92 92 93 lsh Elem Black 178 157 142 188 182 Closed after the 1992-~ White 19 7 4 9 5 school ye. Other 0 0 3 0 Totat 197 164 146 200 187 %Blk 90 96 97 94 97 Mitchell Elem Black 220 220 183 285 232 215 260 250 248 223 White 41 19 24 27 28 12 8 7 12 16 Other 0 0 0 4 3 4 0 2 3 Total 261 239 207 312 264 230 272 257 262 242 %Blk 84 92 88 91 88 93 96 97 95 9~ Rightsell Elem Black 196 194 . 191 282 -- 239 184 225 210 237 \\ 234 White 45 16 _ 1 6 -- 9 4 4 6 5 '' 12 Other 1 ' t 1 . 1 1- 0 3 4  a 3 Total 241 211 193 289 . - 249 189' - 229 - 219 246 - 249 %BIie 81 92 99 98 96 97 98 96 96 Rockefeller Elem Black 255 215 195 282 250 240 264 259 266 2 White 45 33 71 116 104 93 124 131 155 167 Other 2 5 5 7 7 15 16 15 . 19 Total 300 250 271 403 361 340 403 400 436 *450 %Blk 85 86 72 70 69 71 66 64 61 59 Stephens Elem Black 227 225\n,.: 190 235 202 141 : , ( ' - '- ' White 6 - , ,--~ 0 L~ --_ 12 . 9 7 3 Cfo6ad aner Iha f993-!M . Other . - 1 :- 0 ... 1 . - 0 . 1 - . school year. .. - - - Total- . 233\" 226\n - 202 . 245 7' 209 14\u0026amp; _%,RIie 97 100 94 96 97 97 ' - Grand Total Black 1 766 1,643 1,455 1,962 1,690 1,261 1 388 1 354 1,419 -- 1,40't White 207 162 189 253 220 155 186 170 209 -232 Other 0 18 26 20 27 38 55 44 45 \\. ,~ Total 1 973 1,823 1,670 2,235 1,937 1,454 1 629 1,568 1,673 '  -.1 676 %Blk 90 90 87 88 87 87 85 86 85 ! 84  Beginning with the 1994-95 school year, the enrollment for Rockefeller includes the infants, one-year-olds, two-year-olds, and three-year-olds. Before 1994-95, the LRSD included only children in the four-year-old program through sixth grade in Rockefeller's October 1 enrollment report. Note: The blue and yellow highlighting in this section indicate that the school is outside the racial balance guidelines for the year. Blue highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is above the maximum guideline in the desegregation plan\nyellow highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is below the minimum. However, at the time we prepared this report, the LRSD was operating under the terms of a monitoring moratorium\ntherefore, for the 1997-98 school year, we did not a~ the enrollment of LRSD schools in relation to racial balance guidelines. W Page C-14 LASO INCENTIVE SCHOOLS ENROLLMENT Franklin Elementary 60()-,------------- soo+-------------- 400 JOO 200 :oo 1989-90 1991.92 1993-9' 1995-96 1997-98 1988-39 1990-91 1992-93 1994-QS l!X\u0026gt;S.97 Mitchell Elementary soo~------------- soo+-------------- ,oo-+-------------- 1989-90 1991-92 1993-94 1995-96 1997-98 1988-l!9 1990-91 1992-93 1994-95 1996-97 Rockefeller Elementary ,\noo-,-- ------------ 500+-------------- ,oo 300 200 100 ~.......... ........... '\u0026lt;- 1989-90 1991-92 1993-94 1995-96 1997-98 1988-a\u0026amp; 1990-91 1992-83 1994-115 1999-97 Garland Elementary Rightsell Elementary Total Incentive School Enrollment 2,500-,-------------- 1,500 1,000 500  Total  Black O White Note: Beginning with the 1994-95 school year, the enrollment for Rockefeller includes the infants, one-yearolds, tv.o-year-olds, and three-year-olds. Before 1994-95, the LASO included only children in the four-yearold program through sixth grade in Rockefeller's October 1 enrollment report. Page C-15 LRSD AREA SCHOOLS TEN YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON P reoar,e dblY th e Offi ce otDe sear\"\"\"hon Morntorin l Elementary Schools 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 Badgett Elem Black 202 180 166 161 154 132 133 166 185 White 77 57 56 59 48 57 44 44 32  Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 Total 279 237 222 220 202 189 177 210 219 233 %8lk 72 76 75 73 76 70 75 79 84 92 Bale Elem Black 297 292 302 295 248 225 214 243 266 265 White 117 88 66 60 62 68 87 85 94 78 Other 5 7 5 11 10 8 19 15  19 Total 414 385 375 360 321 303 309 347 375 362 %Blk 72 76 81 82 77 74 69 70 71 73 Baseline Elem Black 292 282 272 258 262 265 245 247 241 2ff7 White 108 100 91 74 74 76 77 75 56 44 Other 7 7 5 3 2 4 5 5 12 Total 400 389 370 337 339 343 326 327 302 323 %Blk 73 72 74 77 77 77 75 76 80 83 Brady Elem Black 278 292 330 286 275 263 254 250 236 235 White 169 142 121 128 111 122 137 124 103 98 Other 8 5 6 12 12 17 20 32 39 Total 447 442 456 420 398 397 408 394 371 372 %Blk 62 66 72 68 69 66 62 63 64 63 Chicot Elem Black 363 339 362 341 350 356 344 345 364 .. White 197 188 180 187 177 147 151 99 127 , 127 Other 4 2 3 8 6 8 8 27 , 40 Total 560 531 544 531 535 509 503 452 518 ~ ' 537 %Blk 65 64 67 64 65 70 68 76 70  69 Cloverdale Elem Black 281 294 289 304 291 304 312 384 439 ~ 469 White 165 122 98 84 71 75 74 64 51\n,  4 34 Other 3 2 4 4 7 6 5 10 \\ 9 Total 446 419 389 392 366 386 392 453 500 I 5-12 o/oBlk 63 70 74 78 80 79 80 85 88 ' , , 92 Black .\n\n,,, 189' ., '\nDodd Elem 'ZJO 253 194 166 183 .. 193 190 156 \\ 145 White 144 - .138 134 134 121 97  97 97 82 ~ . \"~ !' 74 C ~\no ~ Other \" ,_ 3 3 3 0 6 . 8 \". 7 4  5 Total 414 394 331 303 304 -~2 298 -- 294 242 -' ( 224 %Blk 65 64 59 55 60 65 65 65 64 . -~ 1:  65 Fair Park Elem Black 247 240 279 257 192 200 204 211 193 ,\" 188 White 94 92 65 60 49 60 73 53 55\nr 54 Other 0 1 3 2 3 5 6 7 '' 6 Total 341 332 345 320 243 263 282 270 255 . ' \". 248 o/oBlk 72 72 81 80 79 76 72 78 76 :. :. Page C-16 LASO Area Schools Ten Year Enrollment Comparison Elementary Schools 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 Forest Park Elem Black 251 223 205 191 198 200 198- 205 218 205 White 172 165 177 206 242 253 228 222 227 219 Other 4 5 5 4 5 6 8 4 6 Total 423 392 387 402 444 458 432 435 449 430 %81k 59 57 53 48 45 44 46 47 49 48 Fulbright Elem Black 327 325 293 231 225 233 235 255 265 . 240 White 271 242 259 264 296 272 289 254 227 247 Other 9 7 11 9 15 18 9 8 8 Total 598 576 559 506 530 520 542 518 500 495 %Blk 55 56 52 46 42 45 43 49 53 48 Geyer Springs Elem Bfack 157 136 145 180 177 208 223 231 233 , 23-7 White 82 69 56 74 105 78 66 71 69 '' 69 Other 0 0 0 0 2 11 8 8 ' . 1-0 Total 239 205 201 254 282 288 300 310 310 ' 316 %Btk 66 66 72 71 63 72 74 75 75 ' 75 Jefferson Elem Black 272 239 237 209 204 213 218 210 207 ' 227 White 216 237 225 270 273 287 279 285 282 279 Other 3 7 5 6 4 5 6 8 '_ 7 Total 488 479 469 484 483 504 502 501 497 513 %Blk 56 50 51 43 42 42 43 42 42 44 MabelvaleElem Black 373 311 321 266 278 311 340 318 308 299 White 213 222 235 234 2t9 174 124 139 104 99 Other 2 3 5 3 3 10 3 6 9 Total 586 535 559 505 500 488 474 460 418 407 o/o Blk 64 58 S7 53 56 64 72 69 74 . 73 McDermott Elem Black 298 314 323 291 275 262 241 259 277 , 273 White 208 190 193 206 220 232 233 213 196\n186 Other 10 8 14 14 15 20 15 16 , ta Total 506 514 524 511 509 509 494 487 489 477 o/o Blk 59 61 62 57 54 51 49 53 57  57 Meado~liff Elem Ebck 312 268 287 252 292 306 279 305 285 ' 263 W.hite 144 . 162 154 174 147 127 131 93 82 ', 59 Other 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 6 ' 10 Totat 456 432 444 4'Zl 440 -~ 434 411 400 373 ' .332 o/o Blk 68 62 65 59 66 71 68 76 76 79 Otter Creek Elem Black 207 170 180 160 143 141 154 13-9 132 151 White 154 172 179 191 203 195 196 193 170 168 Other 0 0 5 7 5 9 7 8 ' 9 Total 361 342 359 356 353 341 359 339 310 328 %Blk 57 50 50 45 41 41 43 41 43 46 Page C-17 LASO Area Schools Ten Year Enrollment Comparison Elementary Schools 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98. Pul Heights Elem Black 226 218 211 185 198 190 197 189 245 2 A White 100 87 108 151 173 197 207 207 200 ( \" Other 2 6 6 8 11 16 . 10 9 8 Total 326 307 325 342 379 398 420 406 454 464 % 81k 69 71 65 54 52 48 47 47 54 55 Terry Elem Black 307 312 289 243 238 243 234 239 231 235 White 215 197 227 253 286 292 295 279 266 253 Other 4 6 16 17 26 30 18 18 . 23 Total 522 513 522 512 541 561 559 536 5151,. 511 % Blk 59 61 55 47 44 43 42 45 45 46 Wakefield Elem Black 316 301 326 329 347  337 327  368 385 322 White . 185 160 169 141 ' 147 106 38  41 Other 3 7 9 6 .. 4:\u0026gt; ., 13. 10 13 ' 1'0 .. Total 501 464 502 ' 479 -500 c 447 \n, / 413 429 436 ' 373  %Bfk 63 65 65 69 69 75 79 86 88 . 86 Watson Elem Black 297 294 347 338 332 353 340 353 394 C 441 White 168 160 168 126 117 89 81 84 80 ,, 4 6 Other 2 3 3 2 0 6 7 5 \\/, 6 Total 465 456 518 467 451 442 427 444 479 \\ .' 493 % Blk 64 64 67 72 74 80 80 80 82 '.  89 Western Hilts Elem . Black ' \\ 213 . _\n:,\n196} '.::\" 204 :' l 90 ,, )'m (r::}' 215 j\nr \u0026lt; 2t5  208 ,.,  219 i i: {-  White ,. 11'9 \u0026lt;\u0026lt; 140 +'\u0026lt; 131  ./  130 . \\24 }[?) 114 \\  ,,:95 :,  106 ... 92 . '. 92  0t~r- ....  ,, , .. : 1: \u0026gt; 4: '. '3 , --: ) ~]'\n'. .  :l' \" .] {:   1 1 . : 1 ' Totaf,. i '\\ 332 fi '~7k:' .3a9 . ']\\'323 :,{@'.3$ \\t[::', 332 i . ') 317 ::: 315 \u0026gt; 312 },, 315 '. %,~ - 64 \u0026gt;\u0026lt; '.\\{sii \\\u0026gt; '\u0026gt;60: [: :\u0026lt; 59 62 65 68 66 70\n\"'' . '70  Wilson Elem Black 289 263 298 288 265 263 254 304 294\n'.\n', '297 White 123 134 118 105 90 87 83 72 57\n\\\\\\53 Other 0 2 0 4 8 8 11 /,,\".\\ t2 Total 412 397 418 394 355 354 345 384 362 ,\n'\n\u0026lt;\\~62 % Blk 70 66 71 73 75 74 74 79 81 \\C ' ' 82 WoodMf Etem: })\n:j f~i i{:ii,}11 1:\nl!'.!! ~lit 1~\n:::ii'\\):~\n::::::~~}\n:'\\\n.: ~\n'\n:\n: '  ~: 'i '.\n:\n:1 ::. ~:::. ~= :\u0026lt;:~ ~ :\n: '~ ': :tTb?\n: \n'\"'] 1:,:\u0026lt;.,.['J :tf,:!}?!:l ,'c:n:: ,,:,., E f:t:iIi\\\\i :r,i'ha {'::e , sf',\\\\\\2 ., ,r~\u0026gt; '(l:~  ::::\n:,,. ~~ ... :: ' ., ,    ::.:::, \u0026lt;': 12  '.',\n\":: \"~54g: ..... 2aa~:,\\ ,28'4 ...\n' ':? , ~~\n74 71 65 64 63 62 61 67 69 \\ \\'.,\"11 Sub Total - Elem Black 6,238 5,879 5,980 5,566 5,483 5,556 5,502 5,789 5,958 ,, 5~020 White 3,499 3,316 3,272 3,388 3,438 3,289 3,207 2,991 Other 76 92 116 123 149 224 185 Total 9,737 9,271 9,344 9,070 9,044 8,994 8933 8,965 %Blk 64 63 64 61 61 62 62 65 Page C-18 LRSD Area Schools Ten Year Enrollment Comparison Junior High Schools 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97  97-98 Alternative - Jr. High Black 10 LRSO cid not prtMd\u0026amp; White 0 October 1 enrollment fa th\u0026amp; alternative jr. higl until 1997- Other 0 96, although 1he schoa was Total 10 eslllbtished before 1997-98. %81k 100 Cloverdale Jr. High Black 424 470 535 531 571 566 521 527 553 552 White 288 251 224 209 192 130 119 73 70 , 52 Other 10 5 5 12 5 7 9 16 . 18 Total 712 731 764 745 775 701 647 609 639 622 %Blk 60 64 70 71 74 81 81 87 87 - 89 Forest Heights Jr. Black 492 538 530 541 554 575 565 578 485 , 452 High White 278 254 224 208 220 195 197 165 135 , 181 Other 16 18 16 13 18 18 16 10  Hi Total 770 808 772 765 787 788 . 780 759 630 .. 648 o/oBlk 64 67 69 71 . 70 73 72 76 77 '. 70 Henderson Jr. High Black 614 680 672 711 685 678 661 623 610 624 Qnciudes a mag,et program) White 340 256 211 135 215 210 229 152 116 88 Other 20 19 13 14 27 27 17 15 12 Total 954 956 902 859 914 915 917 792 741 724 %Blk 64 71 75 83 75 74 72 79 82 ' 86 abelvale Jr. High Black 325 372 404 429 438 453 417 363 347 379 White 256 235 214 235 - 226 197 161 125 116  122\nOther 2 2 1 3 4 7 3 5 4 Total- 581 . 609 620 665 667 654 585 491 468 ' 50S %Blk 56 61 ' 65 65 66 69 71  74 74 .' ' 75 Pul Heights Jr. High Black 429 454 454 468 452 434 431 447 462 I .. 43.7 White 265 256 262 291 319 351 334 327 314 'It,.' 317 Other 11 6 2 3 '5 6 7 9 , t3 Total 694 721 722 761 774 790 771 781 785 \\. 767 %Blk 62 63 63 61 58 55 56 57 59 ' 57 southwest Jr. High Blad{' 512 4 492 521 523 . 52:4 . 487 512 466f, 426 White 222 198. 151 t76 166 14t 105 84  113~_ ' 613 Other 9 12 7 6 - 14 18 16 15 ~ ~ f6 Total 734 700 655 704 695 6-79 610 612 594~ 5-10 %Blk' 70 70 75 74 - 75 77 80 84 78 \\,. 84 Sub Total - Jr. High Black 2 796 3,007 3087 3 201 3,223 3,230 3,082 3 050 2 923 ,. . 2 880 White 1 649 1,450 1 286 1,254 1 338 1 224 1 145 926 864 828 Other 68 62 44 51 73 83  68 70 I 78 Total 4,445 4,525 4435 4,499 4,612 4527 4 310 4,044 3,857  ~786 %Blk 63 66 70 71 70 71 72 75 76 76 Page C-19 LRSD Area Schools Ten Year Enrollment Comparison Senior High Schools AI..C  Senior High Central High (includes a magnet program) Fair High Hall High 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 9fr97  97-98 1 Black While Other Total %Blk Black White Other Total %Blk 8'ack While Other Total %Blk Black White Other Total %Blk Bfack: Whit\u0026amp;- 1,136 884 2,020 56 455 449 904- 50 632 617 1,249 51 502\n: 569: r  Other.  Total - . t 1-71 %Blk. St 1,060 928 1,036 720 617 640 33 35 45 1,813 1,580 1,721 58 59 60 507 504 534 397 353 335- 7 9: 13 911. 866 882 56 58 61 629 694 587 551 502 476 12 16 19 1 192 1,212 1,082 53 57 54 634 ,0. -\n.\n, 613 640  439: ,\n,\n, 379: . 328 ~-\"\\' a . . 11 12 , -1081 . f\n003 980 -,\n5.9 . 2 61 65 1,133 1,178 991 761 618 548 56 33 49 1 950 1 829 1,588 58 64 62 562 580 618 310 311  276 14 8 7 886 899 90t 63 65 69 560 580 662 390 351 313 26 27 36 976 958 1,011 57 61 65 638 t\"'\"' -. 648 . 664 3ti 21,1 ~ - 16 .~~~- 7-  10 966 i:i\\ ~ an 6.8 75 76 974 542 30 1,546 63 638 244 8 890 72 618 254 39 911 68 703 ' 17t 5 884 80 1,073 634 38 1,745 . 61 , 63%  1681i O 1,068 7241 29 813 ' 7571 79 '   81 584 '-. 554- 194 1 ,', 1871 29 '. 43 807  7841 72  71 Sub Total - Sr. High Black 2 825 2,830 2 739 2,797 2 893 2,986 2,935 2,938 3 047 /: 3:03C White 2,519 2107 1,851 1779 1,773 1,491 1340 1,211 1147 /, \\--~tsfl Other 60 71 89 112 75 102 82 81 ::,\n~ Total 5 344 4,997 4 661 4 665 4,778 4,552 4 377 4 231 4,275 //4'\n3()3 I % Blk 53 57 59 60 61 66 67 69 71 \u0026gt;./\n/ro TotaJ.Emallmant :. '~ \\ 11.lWl j \\\nt'.~teh'i:soo 1fif:SM 1~1't~-?t{m1ft1!sta ~'11.1n_.: U:928'.\\t~9:f Area and Non- - ./ - -, ::-: \"' 1~ ' ''t,jJ~ i:\\)f,40g\nh:e\\12-tFA: ... r...::u r\n\\\\ia \".c?:s..692\n,, ~t28 .,. 41S1.-' i631 I Speciality Schookt:, ii~ ~:~~:,:}/ i:'ti~\n~ ,. 225 {/\n~~u/J', t'* g}~~i~z\n.-:409 :ii 335 f ::3\n\\, \u0026gt;_43~ _. tdlaf.: \"t8t62ii ci}l,1m ,T1a:MOi~ 1~-~ ?tts\n43'i 1tlio'13 f :t,1~ ,~#~ . t1.086 \u0026lt;.11.o\u0026lt;x I .,~4:Dk ,,\n~1:\"-e.1\nr\nl* t,2 ~?10{'~-1 ~\u0026lt;,t'.ij~ ~t,'..c\n\\~ (~~\nlt~~ :Jl~'.,1\n? )\n.ct.)J ss , __ 10 \\\\ '/70 Note: Toe blue and yellow highlighting in this section indicate that the school is outside the racial balance guidelines for the I year. Blue highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is above the maximum guideline in the desegregation plan\nyellow highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is below the minimum. However, at the time we prepared this report, the LRSD was operating under the tenns of a monitoring moratorium\ntherefore, for the 1997-98 school I year, we did not assess the enrollment of LRSD schools in relation to racial balance guidelines.  Page C-20  LRSD AREA SCHOOLS* Ten Year Enrollment Comparison 20.000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 --'==:::\n:::=:::\n:::==\n:::==\n:==\n==::::\n::=:::::\n:==\n:====,\" 1989-90 1991-92 1993-94 1995-96 1997-98 1988-89 1990-91 1992-93 1994-95 1996-97  Total II Black O White  Includes those area schools that have a magnet program. The graphs below magnify the total, black, and white enrollment shown above. The graph above is at intervals of 5,000 students\nthose below are at intervals of 500. 13.000 12.500 12.000 11.500 11,000 10,500 10,000 20,000 19,500 19,000 18,500 18,000 17,500 17,000 Black Enrollment Total Enrollment 8,000 7,500 7,000 6-500 6-000 5,500 White Enrollment 5,000 -J.-~--=\n-~~.:\n:~--=\n-~~.:\n:~.:\n~~~~.:\n~~~.:::-:f,,.. Page C-21 School Rockefeller Elem (incentive schoa) Cooperabve Early Childhood Education Mag,et Progam Dunbar Jr. High (interdistnct school) Gifted and Talented Magnet Program Henderson Jr. High (area school) Health Science Magnet Progam Central High (area school) International Studies Magnet Program McClellan High (aras school} Business/Canmla'licaliona Magnet Progam Black White Other Total o/oBlk Black White Other Total %Blk BJack White Other Total %8lk Black White Other Total %Blk Black . White Other ' LASO SCHOOLS WITH MAGNET PROGRAMS TEN YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON Prepared by the Office ot Desegregation Monrtoring 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 255 215  195 282 250 240 45 33 71 116 104 93 2 5 5 7 7 300 250 271 403 361 340 85 86 72 70 69 71 600 454  423 420 410 439 141 120 236 263 283 251 2 4 8 12 11 741 576 663 691 705 701 81 79 64 61 58 63 614 680 672 711  685 678 340 256 211 135 215 210 20 19 13 14 27 954 956 . 902 859 914 915 64 71 75 83 75 74 1,185 1,060  928 1,036 1,133 1,178 885 720 617 640 761 618 33 35 45 56 33 2,070 1,813 1,580 1 721 1,950 1,829 57 58 59 60 58 64 61-5 634 . 613 640  638 648 576 439- \" 379 328 312 2fJ . ~ 8~ 11 .  ~- .. 12 --:~ ~- 16 7 94-95 264 124 15 403 66 468 227 12 707 66 661 229 27 917 72 991 548 49 1,588 62 664 203 .. 10 , Total ' 1,19L 10\u0026amp;1~ 1003. 986 ':a,,/ 966 ' 866' -  an %81kl 52  51 ,, 61  66 \",,, 66 75 76  Indicates the school year the magnet program began. 95-96 96-97 97-98 259 266 264 131 155 167 16 15 19 *406 \"436 *450 64 61 59 440 451 442 279 299 291 13 25 38 732 775 771 60 58 57 623 610 624 152 116  88 17 15 } # 12 792 741 724 79 82 ', 86 974 1,073 1,068 542 634 724 30 38 2S 1,546 1,745 , 1,821 63 61 5.9 708 751  790 . 171 151  ,  1\"32 5 8 ) '  13 884 910\n935 80 83 : 84  Beginning 'Mth the 1994-95 school year, the enrollment for Rockefeller includes the infants, one-year-olds, two-year-olds, and I three-year-olds. Before 1994-95, the LRSD included only children in the four-year-old-program through sixth grade in Rockefeller's October 1 enrollment report. Note: The blue and yellow highlighting in this section indicate that the school is outside the racial balance guidelines for the J year. Blue highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is above the maximum guideline in the desegregation plan\nyellow highlighting indicates that the proportion of black students is below the minimum. However, at the time we prepared this report, the LRSD was operating under the terms of a monitoring moratorium\ntherefore, for the 1997-98 school I year, we did not assess the enrollment of LRSD schools in relation to racial balance guidelines. Page C-22  I School Central High Fair High Kindef'garten program moved after the 1995-96 school year. Hall High McClellan High Kindef'garten program moved alter the 1996-97 school year. Parkview High Kindergarten program ITlOY8d attar the 1996-97 school yea,. Grand Total LASO KINDERGARTEN CLASSES LOCATED AT HIGH SCHOOLS TEN YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISON Prepared by the Office of Desegregation Mon1tor1ng 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 Black 49 50 49 50 49 50 49 White 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 50 50 49 50 49 50 49 %81k 98 100 100 100 100 100 100 Black 11 10 11 8 18 16 13 White 5 3 2 1 1 3 3 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 16 13 13 9 19 19 16 %Blk 69 77 85 89 95 84 81 Black 3 3 9 8 8 6 7 White 16 16 10 11 10 11 13 Other 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Total 19 20 19 19 18 18 20 %8Ik 16 15 47 42 44 33 35 Black 13 13 17 18 18 18 20 White 7 3 3 2 1 2 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 20 16 20 20 19 20 20 %Blk 65 81 85 90 95 90 100 Black 11 14 12 9 16 20 15 White 7 5 0 4 1 0 0 Other 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Total 18 20 12 13 17 20 15 %Blk 61 70 100 69 94 100 100 Black 87 90 98 93 109 110 104 White 36 27 15 18 13 16 16 Other 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 Total 123 119 113 111 122 127 120 %81k 71 76 87 84 89 87 87 95-96 96-97 97-98 43 31 33 1 1 1 1 0 0 45 32 34 96 97 97 13 2 0 15 87 8 13 7 8 3 0 1 0 0 17 16 7 47 81 100 19 15 0 0 1 1 20 16 95 94 18 13 0 0 0 0 18 13 100 100 101 72 40 11 4 1 3 1 0 115 77 41 88 94 98 Page C-23 TEN YEAR ENROLLMENT COMPARISUi- Pr eoar ed b V itl e Office 0 f De seqre, ianon Mo n,t o nnQ School I 88-89 89-90 90-91 I 91-92 92-93 I 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 I 97-98 Badgett Elem Black  14 9 10 8 20 27 25 29 (area school) White 5 6 7 8 5 9 6 2 (Four-year-old program) Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 19 15 17 16 25 36 31 31 %Blk 74 60 59 50 80 75 81 94 Bale Elem Black  9 9 19 19 18 17 (area school) White 9 9 14 11 15 12 (Four-year-old program) Other 0 0 2 5 3 6 Total 18 18 35 35 36 35 % Blk 50 50 54 54 50 49 Baseline Elem BJack  18 23 24 25 27 (area school) White 13 13 10 11 8 (Four-yeer--old progmn) Other 0 0 2 0 0 Total 31 36 36 36 35 %81k 58 64 67 69 n Brady Elem Black  8 8 8 10 9 (area school) White 9 9 9 6 9 (Four-year-old program) Other 0 0 0 2 0 Total 17 17 17 18 18 %Blk 47 47 47 56 50 Chicot Elem Black .  9 9 11 21 18 (area school) White ... -~- 9 1 6 14 17 (Fouryeet-dd progarn) Other 0 2 1 1 0 ..  Total 18 18 18 36 35 %Btk ' .. '\u0026gt; -50 -'- 50 6t 58 51 Cloverdale Elem Black  9 27 34 42 25 29 ( area school) White 7 12 12 10 9 5 (Four-year-old program) Other 1 1 1 1 2 2 Total 17 40 47 53 36 36 %81k 53 68 72 79 69 81 Fair Part\u0026lt; Elem Black \u0026gt;,-\n\".\u0026amp; , ...  -::~? :\n'~- .. _:\n.[\" \" - 1 . :' 18 18 17 17 (araa school) Wtiit\u0026amp; '\n-\\::,rt ,c , .. [,.J\n/~.-~. ~\n:\n'--ft 5 \"'_,\n'\n:/ 1'5 -\n:\n~)~ :.:\n:t\n: ,~,. .'S 16 17 :rr i /':\\~,. ' , ... . jf 'of~', ':. . -~::\nf3 ... ~ .... (Four-~-old progam) Other . .. . '\"'-'  0 3 . 3 2 Total, .. '.,\n..._ ... -a- ~ (\n', 15 ~~1b?36\n: 36 .\" ~-\n36 36 . ' . -- .  %Blk .. .. , .. 47 ... -~ 50 50 47 47 Franklin Elem Black  29 36 31 27 28 46 63 61 58 (incentive school) White 25 19 25 24 18 21 6 9 12 (Four-year-old program) Other 5 3 4 3 3 5 0 2 2 Total 59 58 60 54 49 72 69 72 7 %81k 49 62 52 50 57 64 91 85 81 Page C-24 LRSD Early Childhood Programs Ten Year Enrollment Comparison School 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 Garland Elem Black  11 11 9 9 15 13 15 16 (incentive school) White 7 5 3 0 0 1 1 0 (Foor-year-old progam) Other 2 2 0 5 3 4 2 2 Total 20 18 12 14 18 18 18 18 %Blk 55 61 75 64 83 72 83 89 Geyer Springs Elem Black  9 11 23 21 21 18 (area school) White 9 5 11 15 15 14 (Four-year-old program) Other 0 2 3 1 0 3 Total 18 18 37 37 36 35 %Blk 50 61 62 57 58 51 lsh Elem Black  Data not 12 9 (incentiY\u0026amp; school) White 3.vailat le for 4 3 (Four-year-old progarn) Other 1988 89. 1 0 School closed after the 1992- Total 1989 90. 17 12 93 school year. %Blk nd 19 ~0-91 71 75 King Elem Black  27 32 40 36 35 (interdistr1ct school) White 31 31 31 34 35 (Four-year-old program) Other 2 3 0 1 1 Total 60 66 71 71 71 %Blk 45 48 56 51 49 Mabelvale Bern Black  9 9 11 9 (area school) White 8 8 6 7 (Four-year-old progam) Other 1 0 0 0 Total 18 17 17 16 %Blk 50 53 65 56 Mitchell Elem Black  13 9 11 19 17 13 13 (incentive school) White 7 5 1 0 1 3 5 (Four-year-old program) Other 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 Total 20 14 12 19 18 18 18 %Blk 65 64 92 100 94 72 72 Rightsell Elem Black  11 9 10 17 16 16 9 (Incentive school) White 5 6 0 1 2 1 8 (Four-year-\u0026lt;lid progam) Other 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Total 16 15 10 18 18 18 18 %Blk 69 60 100 94 89 89 50 Rockefeller Elem Black 16 21 26 23 (incentive school) White 16 19 17 19 (Infant through three-year-old Other Data beforE 1994- ~5 not orovid ed 1 2 3 3 program) Total 33 42 46 45 %Blk 48 50 57 51 Page C-25 Ui::.u c:a 11y 1...,rn1anooo i---rograms I en t edr 1:::nro111111:rn vv11 ,1-1011:ov1, School 88-a9 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 Rockefeller Elem Black  Data r wt 31 25 28 32 (incentive school) White avai labl e for 28 22 23 16 (Four-year-old program) Other 1988- 59. 1 2 0 5 Total 1989-\u0026lt;)0 . 60 49 51 53 Blk ahd 199 0-91 52 51 55 60 Romine Elem Black  9 9 19 18 (i nterdistrict school) White 10 4 11 16 (Four-year-old program) Other 0 4 2 2 Total 19 17 32 36  Blk 47 53 59 50 Stephens Elem Black  20 14 12 8 8 8 (incentiv\u0026amp; school) White 0 3 7 4 3 1 (Four-year-old program) Other 0 0 1 0 0 0 School closed attar the 1993- Total 20 17 20 12 11 9 94 school year. %Blk 100 82 60 67 73 89 Washington Elem Black  20 18 20 36 (interdistrict school) White Date not 16 18 14 11 (Four-year-old program) Other availa )le for 1 0 0 5 Total 1989-~ '.) and 37 36 34 52 Blk 199( 1-91 54 50 59 69 Watson Elem Black .  11 9 30 (atea school) .. White 6 7 6 (Four-year-old program) Other .,. ... 0 0 0 ,.._  Total -: . . : 17 16 36 :- .... ,.. . %8Ik  65 56  83 Wilson Elem Black  9 9 (area school) White 8 8 (Four-year-old program) Other 0 0 Total 17 17 Blk 53 53 Woodruff Elem ,.,. . Black :/-.-.,\n:: }i\\ , ll'-'',:\":-::_--0.::--.:-t--::..:---.c :. ,,-.::,:,\n,: }?+ \\.,',o \\'0 1ii (area school) .. ...  ..... White /  \u0026gt;: .. :--\n])f1i{, -:::: .. : .t \n:.\n7 . i:1' 4 ...  -::/ ::::,:-::::::?--:, :,, (FOUl'.-year-\u0026lt;\u0026gt;id program)  . Other ....... \u0026lt; ........................ .::::.Jt\" '!ii: . :: J \\\n::: t  Total 'Y . :: :ft+ h,i)::y?. ...:.: ,.... . ....... ... ---'::\n. .::}:/ij 5 ...   \u0026lt;I %Blk .. ::::\n-':}-: y\nr :\n:]I~H\\ O?),.: ... -.\n-:---: :.-' ...... .... _.,. ...... .,._ :,.::- ',.,-.OU :---::--7: 0/ Grand Total Black 20 43 73 155 188 285 White 0 28 38 110 141 191 Other 0 5 6 9 11 16 Total 20 76 117 274 340 492 %Blk 100 57 62 57 55 58  Indicates the first year LASO established an early childhood program at that school. Page C-26 9 8 1 18 50 ['{{'\n18 :/\n: 15 !E\\:.:2- --:\n:36 :::::\nIso 435 220 38 693 63 95-96 96-97 97-98 25 27 27 23 26 26 3 0 51 53 5., 49 51 51 21 19 18 10 13 14 2 4 4 33 36 36 64 53 50 30 26 27 22 21 20 1 5 6 53 52 53 57 50 51 25 23 34 10 12 -- 0 1 0 35 36 36   71 64 94 10 9 9 7 9 8 1 0 1 18 18 18 56 50 50 - ' 20 : ..  - ---\u0026lt;::--19 18 [.} :16 -::- . .  16. -':C:' 15 I S') Q . . :\u0026lt;'. 1 1 1\"'''\"\"\\ .. __ :. : 36 34 :0--:\"/'\n .:,u :1-:c\n:.ss. :\u0026lt;1 : 53: 53 480 463 460 241 260 255 26 33 34 747 756 749 64 61 Elementary Schools Badgett Bale Baseiine Booker Brady Catver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Garland Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitcheil Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightseil Rockefeller Romine Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff Total LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMPARISON OF CURRENT YEAR ENROLLMENT TO BUILDING CAPACITY Prepared by the Office of Desegregabon Mon,tonng Oct 1, 1997 1997-98 Percentage Enrollment Capacity Filled 233 257 91% 362 401 90% 323 390 83% 597 656 91% 372 467 80% 596 613 97% 537 558 96% 512 492 104% 224 328 68% 248 351 71% 430 399 108% 464 434 107% 495 540 92% 271 298 91% 316 328 96% 311 353 88% 513 492 104% 658 728 90% 407 515 79% 477 517 92% 332 465 71% 242 298 81% 328 351 93% 4o4 374 124% 249 258 97% 450 469 96% 328 487 67% 511 515 99% 373 492 76% 660 836 79% 493 492 100% 315 328 96% 479 517 93% 362 394 92% 284 324 88% 14,216 15,717 90% Junior High Oct 1, 1997 1997-98 Percentage Schools Enrollment Capacity Filled ALC-Jr. High 10 Cloverdale 622 868 72\"(, Dunbar 771 812 95~ Forest Heights 648 858 76%, Henderson 724 907 801% Mabelvale sos 614 82\"(, Mann 858 850 101~ Pulaski Heights 767 745 103~ Southwest 510 737 69(, Total 5,415 6.391 85~~ Senior High Oct 1, 1997 1997-98 Percentage Schools Enrollment Capacity Filled ALC-Senior High 6 Central 1,855 1,891 98~0 Fair 757 954 79\"(, Hall 791 1,291 61~ McClellan 935 1,199 78c%, Parkview 911 1,000 91~ Total 5,255 6,335 83%\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_432","title":"Finances","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":["1989/1991"],"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","Education--Finance","Education--Evaluation","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Finances"],"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/432"],"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\nFINANCE COMMITTEE SUMMARY November 21, 1989 GOVERNING GUIDELINE FOR THE COMMITTEE: \"How to achieve adequate funding for our schools.\" 1. 2. 3. 4 . Areas to explore: to review present operating cost. Ways to increase revenues. Best ways to Invest the money we do have. Propose Immediate and long term options. TOPICS DISCUSSED AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Reorganize district debt to lower payments over the next few years by extending that debt over a longer period of time. *B. Shift current debt mills that are no longer needed to fund debt payments to maintenance and operations so that additional revenues may be realized through the forty percent (40S() pullback provision of State law which allows the pulling back of revenues from the succeeding year for current year use. *C. Participate in inter-district schools designed to enhance the desegregation programs of all three districts located In Pulaski County, which will enhance the revenue condition of the districts by providing more State funding. D. Merged Services (ranked according to savings potential). 1. 2. Food Service - seemed to have most promising value. Transportation - although complicated. Is a likely area for significant savings when thoroughly studied. 3. Printing services - some savings presently realized by utilizing vo-tech program. 4. E. F. G. Should investigate to maximize utilization. Data Processing - unlikely due to widely differing methods of operation. 5. Purchasing - all three districts are already appear to be receiving maximum benefits due to their own high volumes. 6. Warehousing Functions - no obvious savings apparent. exploring further. other non-profit sector? Selling Services *1. But worth Can excess space be leased to other districts or Food Services - sales to other districts not just to North Little Rock and Little Rock. 2. Data Processing Services - explore possibility of selling services to other districts. Continue To Build On \"Business Partner's\" Relationship. Positively Take Full Advantage of Free or Low Cost Programs. (Recent Commercial News Deal Pulaski County Accepted Is a Good Example). H. Grant Money - Maximize our opportunities to receive all funds that are available. *1. All Incentive and magnet programs should be closely monitored to assure a favorable cost:benefit ratio. J. Voluntary pupil movement may cost more initially, but is necessary to guarantee parental support, and provide necessary stability that will produce greater long term savings and enhance ability to raise funds. *K. Develop Slick Advertising Campaign to Promote: Theme - \"Good things that are happening in our schools.\" 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Parent Involvement with school and administration. Teachers and administrators - quality and commitment. Combat negative media image. Quality of education In every school. Extra opportunities available: magnets, incentive. Inter-district. 6. The Importance of parents and patrons. Perceived stability through positive ad campaign will promote real stability which will enhance our opportunities for increased public funding. FINAL COMMENTS Our committee felt that time allowed was too short for adequate study of Pulaski County Special School District's financial condition. We also believe current committees should be continued beyond the planned preparation to monitor and enhance implementation. Which would promote the essential parent/patron Involvement which is needed in our school system. *Indlcates areas we consider to have a high probability for immediate Impact on our financial condition..5 Deloitte \u0026amp; Touche Ill Center Street, Suite 1800 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-4420 Telephone: (501) 374-0206 Facsimile: (501) 374-4809 March 7, 1990 Mr. Eugene Rev i I Ie Metropolitan Supervisor Office of Metropolitan Supervisor Her i tage West Bui Iding 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  Dear Mr. Revi lie: Deloitte \u0026amp; Touche is pleased to respond to your request for assistance in performing an assessment of the costs incurred by the Little Rock School District (the \"District\") which are attributable to the U.S. District Court (the \"Court\") desegregation order. This proposal is based upon: Information supplied to us during personnel and yourself. interviews with both District read i ng of the February 16, 1988 II Recommendations of the Special Master. II Interim Report and A  A reading of Volume I of the \"Little Rock School District Proposed Desegregation Plan\" dated January 31, 1989.  A reading of the District's Fund 13 (i.e.. Desegregation Account) record of expenditures for fiscal year 1989. Based upon our initial interviews and preliminary assessment of the documents supplied to us by the District, we believe that a more detailed accounting of District desegregation activities would appear to de desirable in order to:  Establish rules for the District's accounting and reporting of desegregation costs for reimbursement by the Court's desegregation fund. Estab I i sh a base year II programs and associated costs. benchmark for allowable desegregation order This procedure is necessary in to both provide the District with a basis for financial forecasting and for the Court to have a mechanism to readily identify new initiatives of the District which are additions to the approved \"base year\" programs. Since each succeeding year's budget for the District builds upon the platform of the District's prior year desegregation programs, it is essential to clarify allowable base year desegregation costs so that both the Court and the District can monitor program performance and costs.STATEMENT OF THE EXISTING SITUATION The Metropolitan Supervisor serves as an agent of the U.S. District Court in allocating funds to the Little Rock School District to implement Court mandated changes in the District's operations and programs to achieve a goal of desegregation. The Metropolitan Supervisor has a responsibiIi ty to ensure than desegregation funds are used in an appropriate and prudent way In recent months both the to implement the directives of the Court. Metropolitan Supervisor and the Court have expressed concerns regarding the reasonableness of costs which the District has reported as being incurred to achieve the desegregation goal. A more detailed accounting of program expenditures for desegregation activities Fs essential to provide the Court and the Metropolitan Supervisor with the assurances that:  Claimed desegregation costs fully conform with the plan for desegregat ion.  Claimed costs are reasonable and have been incurred by the District.  Claimed costs correlate to the specific programs identified in the plan, and that actual expend i tures by the District for desegregation programs conform to the budgets set forth in the plan. The Little Rock District s i m i I a r I y i s reimbursement process for desegregation costs. experiencing problems with the operated at a deficit, and is experiencing H The District recently has cash flow\" problems. In this environment the District's financial planning can be greatly disrupted if:  Claimed reimbursements for desegregation costs are disallowed by the Court.  Court payments are not made on a timely basis. Certain financial Distr ict can be alleviated forecasting difficulties currently experienced by the if a set of rules for the accounting and reporting of allowable desegregation costs can be developed. POLICIES NEEDED TO ASSURE RELIABLE INFORMATION Our preliminary analysis of the existing situation has identified a series of policies that must be developed to define an H cost. H allowable desegregation It should be noted that the listing of policies identified here is preliminary in nature and is based upon our initial two-day assessment of the existing situation in order to develop this proposal. During the performance of the project, we would expect to substantially refine this preliminary listing of required policy decisions. Policies which appear to be required include addressing the following questions\n- 2 -)  What percentage of target group students which must compromise program beneficiaries in order to permit 100% of program costs to be al lowed?  Should desegregation costs not presented or itemized in the plan be al lowed?  Should claimed desegregation costs be allowed to vary significantly form the budgeted amounts set forth in the plan?  Should programs implemented before the desegregation order funded in whole or in part from the Cour Vs desegregation funds? be The preliminary listing of policy issues described above and other issues that will possibly be identified during the project must be addressed and resolved in order to establish the allowability of certain costs claimed by the District. OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT Our objectives in performing this project include:  Assisting the Metropolitan Supervisor in establishing a financial report ing procedure which prov i des means of report ing desegregation costs associated with specific desegregation programs Iisted in the plan. a Identifying policy decisions which are necessary to establish which programs and costs will be allowable reimbursable desegregation costs.  Contrasting program expenditures with the beneficiaries of those program expenditures to identify instances where the costs of a desegregation program activity should possibly be shared by the District and the Court. Identifying expenditures, if any, which vary significantly from the budgeted amounts for the program set forth in the plan. Identifying expenditures, if any, claimed by the District which may not be clearly attributable to the plan.  Developing recommendations to strengthen the process for updating and monitoring the District's plan for desegregation. In conducting our analysis we plan to use fiscal year 1989 plan, budget and expenditure data as the benchmark year for establishing programs and costs which are allowable and reimbursable costs. The policy, procedure and reporting issues identified during our analysis of fiscal year 1989 data should provide the necessary foundation for the Court to evaluate and act upon subsequent fiscal year claims by the District for cost reimbursement. - 3 - WHAT WE PROPOSE the District's claimed The appropriate starting point for analysis of desegregation costs would appear to be the fiscal year 1988 operating The fiscal year 1988 expenditures will provide a basis for expend i tures. the subsequent evaluation of fiscal year 1989 expenditures to determine whether fiscal year 1989 District activities are new initiatives in response to the desegregation order or are reclassifications of previously existing activities and programs. In establishing the fiscal year 1988 expenditure data, we will analyze and document:  District programs existing in served and costs. 1988 in terms of size, students  Identify teacher/pupiI ratios by school. We will also prepare a profile of each school for which desegregation costs were claimed in fiscal year 1989. The profile for a school will document the status of the school with respect to the desegregation activity in fiscal year 1988. As an example, the District has indicated that additional custodial employees were assigned to certain schools in fiscal year 1989 as part of the desegregation initiative to improve the cleanliness and Our profile of fiscal year 1988 practices would appearance of the school. establish whether a custodial employee claimed in fiscal year 1989 was or was not performing substantially the same duties in fiscal year 1988. Once we have established the fiscal year 1988 benchmark data, we will then Activities claimed by the District analyze fiscal year 1989 District costs to isolate desegregation related activities instituted by the District. will be costed on a program basis. We will then contrast the fiscal year 1988 benchmark data with the fiscal year 1989 desegregation costs claimed by the District to:  Identify on a program-by-program basis new desegregation activities implemented by the District. Building upon the custodial example, we might indicate that five new custodians had been retained and assigned to schools A, B, C, D and E. V,'  We would also estimate the cost of this program. Identify instances and associated costs where a preexisting fiscal year 1988 activity had been reclassified as a desegregation cost. Again as an example. if a student/teacher ratio at a particular school were ten to one in fiscal year 1988, we would identify a claimed desegregation cost in fiscal year 1989, if it purported to be for the purposes of reducing the student/teacher ratio at the school to a ten to one ratio. - 4 -t It should be stressed that both the custodial and teacher/student ratio examples are presented only as examples to facilitate an understanding of our planned approach. We have no information which indicates these examples are factual and they should not be construed as factual by the reader. After we have isolated the specific desegregation activities of the District in fiscal year 1989, we will perform additional tests. One test wiI I consist of a program activity-by-activity review to determine whether the program activity is focused upon the targeted disadvantaged student group or serves a I I students. If all students participate in a particular program activity, we will determine a reasonable allocation of the program activity's costs between those allocable to the target group and those allocable to the non-target group. We will contrast each desegregation program and its associated costs with the desegregation plan to identify, if any:  Programs which are not referenced in the plan.  Programs where expenditures have been claimed by the District which vary significantly from planned amounts. We wi I I select expenditures on a random basis and will examine 1) support to verify the desegregation related nature of the expenditure and 2) related disbursement support. We will then prepare a report for the Metropolitan Supervisor which lists in sequential order each program activity claimed by the District in fiscal year 1989 as a desegregation related activity. For each program, we will:  Briefly describe the purpose and objective of the program activity. Identify the costs of the activity. Identify and explain, if applicable, any costs which appear to be reclassifications of an activity which existed and was performed in fiscal year 1988, the base comparison year. Identify program activities which are shared by disadvantaged and other students and recommend an appropriate proration of costs. Finally, we will track and list legal expenditures by the District from fiscal year 1981 to the present. If District records permit, we will also classify legal expenditures as related or unrelated to the desegregation suit. Our final report will also identify certain policy decisions required in order to clarify the reimbursement process and wiI I further present recommendations for the types of reports which should be prepared by the District to support future claims for reimbursement. - 5 -Only the Court can and should decide whether a particular District desegregation initiative meets the intent of the Court order. Our proposed I eve I of assistance intended to ensure that both the Metropolitan Supervisor and the Court are in full possession of the facts with regard to the financial and program activities data. Such facts wi11 ass i st providing them with sufficient information to permit them to make difficult decisions regarding the appropriate allocation of funds to the District for desegregation activities. I s i n PROJECT STAFFING Our proposed project team for this engagement will include: Mr. David Bankard, a partner from our Firm's national public sector pract ice. Mr. Bankard will serve as the engagement partner and will be responsible for the overall performance of the work and for all deliverable products which are developed. Mr. C. Michel Haigh, the partner in charge of our Firm's Little Rock office. our Firm. Mr. Haigh is a very experienced audit partner with He will serve as the technical partner for the project and will advise our project team regarding accounting treatments and testing procedures. Ms. Rozanne Thompson. pract ice, wi I I serve a manager as our the project manager. Firm's pub Iic sector She wiI I be responsible for the development of our detailed project work plan and the supervision of the day-to-day performance of the work. i n Ms. Lee Ann Shell, an audit manager in our Little Rock office, will serve as a team leader. The team will be further supplemented with senior and staff accountants from our Little Rock office. Our team collectively possesses the necessary blend of K through 12 expertise and knowledge of accounting and costing procedures to efficiently and effectively perform this analysis in a manner which is highly responsive to your needs. PROJECT SCHEDULE AND COSTS We estimate that the analysis can be accomplished in a six week period, are prepared to begin work on the project immediately. We - 6 - Our fee quotation for this project is $65,000 plus expenses. This quotat ion represents a significant discount from our usual and customary fees. The fee quotation includes an oral presentation and discussion of our findings and recommendations for the Metropolitan Supervisor and/or the Court. The fee quotation does not, however, include any expert witness testimony which may result from the performance of the work. Should expert witness testimony be required, we would plan to bill these services at our full standard rates. * We appreciate this opportunity to assist \"the Metropolitan Supervisor with the performance of this important project. It is our belief that the accounting rules and procedures which are developed during this project will provide the necessary framework for controlling and monitoring desegregation expenditures for many years to come. road It More importantly, the rules of the which are developed during this project will improve relationships between the Court and the District by establishing the financial parameters under which desegregation costs will be reimbursed by the Court. Our ability to perform the work described in this proposal is clearly predicated upon the cooperation of District personnel who will need to provide access to program and financial data. We look forward to working with you. Should you have any questions regarding this proposal, please feel free to contact either Mr. David Bankard at (312) 856-8130 or Mr. Mike Haigh at (501) 374-0206. Very truly yours. David M. Bankard Partner C. Michel Haigh Partner - 7 - TO: Little Rock School District March 16, 1990 Members of the Metropolitan Supervisor's Financial Committee FROM: Ruth Steele, Superintendent We need to seek endorsement from the Financial Committee on two items with respect to the use of desegregation settlement funds. 1) We have provided documentation to support our position that a hearing officer and related expenses should be included in the desegregation budget. Both our preliminary plan submitted to the Metropolitan Supervisor and the Court approved plan address' the needs to reduce the disparity of disciplinary actions. In our preliminary plan, we also submitted a funding proposal that included a hearing officer and a budget for positive student discipline. 2) The district has had a serious cash flow problem for the past year and a half. Although we received the first payments from the Settlement a couple of months ago, these payments merely reimbursed the district for desegregation expenses already incurred. cash. As a result, we are on the brink of running out of The Settlement provides for a $6,000,000 loan to be \"loaned\" to district for desegregation programs. We have asked our attorneys and the State to draft the loan documents so that these funds will be available to fund desegregation efforts. We are requesting that the Financial Committee establish and endorse a procedure that permits the LRSD to make withdrawals from the proceeds of the loan fund that are in the Metropolitan Supervisor's escrow account. It is requested that the procedure provide for timely withdrawals that will assist LRSD in avoiding unnecessary interest costs. The district has been negotiating with local banks for several weeks to secure a line of credit to alleviate our cash flow problems. They have requested that we pledge as additional collateral for the line of credit the Settlement payments to be paid on July 1, 1990. We request that the Committee endorse the district pledging the payments as collateral for a line of credit. The necessity to pledge these payments will be minimized if a procedure is established with regards to loan fund proceeds. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361Little Rock School District To: From: March 21, 1990 V. a r\nOffice of Metropolitan Supervisor - Finance Committee \"KUth S. Steele, Superintendent of Schools Subject: Request for Determination on Allowable Desegregation Costs MW 2 1 W i..2! In keeping with efforts to ensure that desegregation funds are used in an appropriate way, the Little Rock School District (LRSD) submits for your consideration the following expenditure estimates for planned desegregation activities: 1. Curriculum Audit  A description of this activity, as written in the January 2, 1990 Tri-Distrlct Desegregation Plan is enclosed as Exhibit I. Current estimates on the cost for this activity are $5,000 for 1990-91 and $50,000 for 1991-92. Original cost estimates provided by LRSD for the curriculum audit were $5,000 for 1990-91 and $100,000 for 1991-92. It is our belief that the curriculum audit should be accomplished during the first semester of the 1990-91 school year to provide maximum effectiveness in the development of plans for reducing disparity in the academic achievement of students. Further, we believe that it would be beneficial to have advanced training in the 1989-90 school school year for two or more staff members who will serve on the internal audit team. This approach will permit members of the internal audit team to become familiar with the audit process and thus enable preparation of information for use by the external audit team. 2. Two-Run Bus System -- Exhibit II provides details on changing from a three-run to a two-run bus system. At this time, it is estimated that the annual cost for this part of the Desegregation Plan will be $600,000 for 1990-91 plus Increases 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3301of three percent for the next four years of the capital lease payment period. Revised costs estimates will be provided no later than the end of the five year payment period. We have been advised that an order for new buses should be placed no later than April 2, 1990 to ensure delivery for the beginning of the 1990-91 school year. 3. Information on Magnet Schools and Programs required by the Trl-Dlstrlct Desegregation Plan Is enclosed as Exhibit III. According to the Plan, Dunbar Junior High School will open In the fall of 1990 as an Interdlstrlct Magnet School for International Studies and for Gifted and Talented Education. A joint planning committee has de- veloped recommendations on facilities renovations that would be appropriate to the themes at Dunbar and would enhance recruitment of students to the new Interdlstrlct Magnet School. Cost estimates for Initial renovations at Dunbar are enclosed as Exhibit IV. He are seeking approval on the described renovations at this time so that work might proceed on schedule. Additional estimates will be submitted as planning continues on Dunbar.From: Tri-District Desegregation Plan - January 2, 1990 Exhibit I INFORMATION ON CURRICULUM AUDIT These recommendations are made in addition to the ones proposed by the districts. The individual district plans follow. PLANS FOR REDUCING DISPARITY\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT The Little Rock School District has identified three problems related to equity in the academic achievement of its students. First, disparity continues between black and white achievement, as evidenced by grades and standardized tests. Second, black and white students are disproportionately represented in certain classes, programs, and activities. And third. the level of learning expected from students often varies according to a student's race. These problems will be addressed in the following ways: Problem One\nDisparity in Educational Achievement Despite years of awareness of the problem and numerous attempts to combat it, the disparity in educational achievement between black and white students continues, worsening as students move from grade to grade. The Little Rock School District will develop the following programs to address this problem. Five-Year Program Review\nThe district will immediately develop a five-year schedule for the review of all courses and including incentive programs, and magnet schools. to determine whether their content is sufficiently challenging, students. relevant, and enriching to all 5Curriculum Audit: The Little Rock School District will conduct a \"curriculum audit\" of instructional programs and services during the next five years according to a schedule, in order to prearranged assess their effectiveness for all students. Programs to be audited include, but are not limited to: Chapter 1 Reading and Math Drug Education Foreign Languages Four-Year-Old Program Gifted and Talented Education Guidance and Counseling Homework Centers Kindergarten Language Arts Learning Lab Library-Media Mathematics Music Physical Education, Health, and Nutrition Education Program for Accelerated Learning (PAL) Reading Science Social Studies Special Education Vocational Education The first programs to be audited will include Chapter 1 Reading and Math, Guidance and Counseling, PAL Learning Lab, and Foreign Languages. The purpose of the review will be to determine whether programs need to be modified to increase their educational value to students. In some cases programs may need to be eliminated or drastically changed. Review Multiethnic Curriculum Guides: Curriculum supervisors will be required to review the use of the multiethnic curriculum guides in order to propose necessary revisions and modifications. This review will be done yearly so that problems which become apparent can be quickly resolved. Instructional Management: The Little Rock School District will seek assistance Instructional Management System in for establishing an Technology now exists that can analyze every a student. student's learning style and achievement level, predict success or failure in school based on certain factors, and prescribe the necessary interventions in a timely manner. The 6district will inunediately engage experts in instructional technology to devise such a system. It should be noted that this approach is intended to benefit the successful as well as the unsuccessful student. The district will attempt to have this program in place by 1991-92. Problem Two\nDisproportionate Representation in Programs The disproportion representation of blacks and whites is not' a problem that can be addressed by simplistic solutions such as quotas or percentages, which are often humiliating and frustrating to students. All students, both the gifted and the low-achieving. must be provided every opportunity to excel, contribute, produce. and be challenged in school. A necessary precondition for this to occur is a strong basic education for all students beginning with kindergarten or before, and enrichment for disadvantaged children so they can compete with the more advantaged without losing ground over the years. Enrichment activities include additional or extended homework centers, summer learning programs, Saturday classes, extended day programs, academic incentive programs, and tutorial services. In schools that lack these programs, the district will allocate funds to establish at least one such program in each school. Principals, teachers, and guidance counselors can positively affect this problem. However, Boards of Education and administrators must support their efforts and insist on optimum learning opportunities for all students. The extent to which staff development can assist teachers and administrators in dealing with this problem will be discussed in the staff development section of this plan. 7From: Tri-District Desegregation Plan January 2, 1990 Exhibit II DETAILS ON TWO-RUN BUS SYSTEM student Assignment Appeals Conunittee\nThe Appeals Committee will consist of one representative from each of the following organizations: the Biracial Advisory Committee the PTA Council the Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association The Appeals Committee will also include two members at-large appointed by the Board of Directors, and one ex-officio member (an administrator) appointed by the Superintendent. The Appeals Committee will meet once each month to hear appeals. It will review only the following types of appeals: --geographic isolation racial isolation medical hardship --extenuating circumstances (as defined by the parent) Transportation: For the 1989-90 school year, the Little Rock School District is using a three-run bus system with schools opening on the first run at 7:55 a.m., on the second run at 8:50 a.m., and on the third run at 9:40 a.m. For the 1990-91 school year, the Little Rock School District will use a two-run bus system with the first-run schools opening at 8 a.m. and the second-run schools opening at 8:50 a.m. The Little Rock School District will also attempt to have all 17From: Tri-District Desegregation Plan - January 2, 1990 Exhibit III INFORMATION ON MAGNET SCHOOLS AND PROGRAMS PROPOSED INTERDISTRICT MAGNET SCHOOLS AND PROGRAMS 1990-91 1. Washington Basic Skills/ Math and Science Magnet Grades Pre K-6 2. Dunbar International Studies/ Gifted and Talented Magnet Grades 7-9 3. Central High International Studies Interdistrict Program Grades 10-12 4. Rockefeller Cooperative Early Childhood Education Demonstration Magnet Grades Pre K-6 1991-92 1. University Laboratory Magnet Grades Pre K-9 2. Franklin Early Childhood Environmental Science/Basic Skills Magnet Grades Pre K-6 3. Romine Gifted and Talented/ Basic Skills Magnet Grades Pre K-6 Aerospace/Technology Pre-Engineering Magnet Grades 7-12 1992-93 1. Business/Coiiununications Magnet Grades 7-12 2. Environmental Sciences/Zoo Magnet Grades 7-9 3. Garland Montessori Magnet Grades Pre K-6 4 . 1993-94 1. MacArthur Park Science/Natural History/Arts Magnet Grades Pre K-6 8elementary schools on the first run and all secondary schools on the second run. In order to move from a three-run to a two-run bus system, the Little Rock School District will need to acquire approximately forty additional buses before the 1990-91 school year and plan to replace approximately 15 to 20 buses per year, beginning in 1991-92. Financing these purchases with capital leases should reduce the first-year impact on the budget. In addition. the two-run system will require approximately thirty additional drivers and two route supervisors. 18DESCRIPTION OF INTERDISTRICT MAGNET SCHOOLS AND PROGRAMS There will be twelve additional interdistrict magnet schools in the Little Rock School District, with student ratios of 55-60 percent black and 40-45 percent white, and one, Central High School, that will be a limited interdistrict school. The 55-60 ratios will be implemented in the initial grades at the six existing magnets. There will be one interdistrict magnet school in the Pulaski County Special School District, and one. Oak Grove Jr./Sr. High School, that will provide an interdistrict program. Student ratios will be set at the maximums allowed by the court. Some funding for the interdistrict magnets will be through majority-to- minority transfers. The themes of every school will be further discussed and reviewed with parents for possible modification. LITTLE ROCK INTERDISTRICT MAGNET SCHOOLS Washington Basic Skills/Math/Science (Pre K-6) This school will open in 1990-91 for students who learn well in a highly-structured setting\nwho are motivated by academic. physical, and social competition\nand who are interested in math and science. 9Dunbar International Studies/Gifted and Talented (7-9) Dunbar Junior High School will open in the fall of 1990 as an Interdistrict Magnet School for International Studies 4nd for Gifted and Talented Education. A joint planning committee of area businesses, school administrators from the three districts, staff. and parents will be formed to supplement present plans developed by the district. They will start Feb. 1, 1990, to develop international studies programs for both Dunbar Junior and Central High Schools. A pledge of cooperation and support has been secured from the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce and from Arkansas-based businesses interested in seeing the schools of Arkansas succeed. Those area businesses include Systematics Inc., Stephens Inc., Jacuzzi, Maybe1line. Timex, Orbit Valve, and TCBY. Other businesses will be approached to seek their assistance in this process. These corporations have significant international business interests. Central High School (10-12) A limited interdistrict magnet program will be offered at Central High School. Approximately 175 seats will be opened to students from North Little Rock, Pulaski County, and other neighboring districts at the beginning of the 1990-91 school year. Other seats will be made available to any student on a space available basis and in compliance with desegregation limits. The program will be developed around a theme of international studies 10TO: FROM: Exhibit IV COST ESTIMATES FOR DUNBAR RENOVATIONS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANT SERVICES 3601 South Bryant Street Little Rock, AR. 72204 Bob Robertson, Vernon E. THROUGH: DATE: Principal, Dunbar Junior High School Smith, Construction Manager Doug Kendall, Director of Plant Services March, 14, 1990 SUBJECT: received mak 1990 SERVICES Proposed Renovations to Dunbar Junior High School The following is an estimated cost for proposed renovations of a rpeting, windows, and grounds, cosmet ic building, and materials to complete the job. improvements to the DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Carpet and Pad Removal and Replacement (16,348 Stage Curtains Lighting in Auditorium sq. ft.) Auditorium P.A. Main System Intercom System (Console Only) Electrical (Computer Room) Seif Sufficient Air Handler (B-5) Masonary Cleaning Window Replacement (Clear Plexiglass) Parking Lots (New) Asphalt Drive for Bus Drop Off Sidewalk Repairs Basket Ball Courts \u0026amp;. Goals Landscaping Removal of Two (2) Existing Flagpoles From Old Carver \u0026amp; Gilliam and installation at Dunbar Junior High (Completion Date, April 15, 1990) $ 15,000.00 3,707.60 3,882.00 1,200.00 2,500,00 1,250.00 5,500.00 3 ,090.00 30,720.00 14,775.00 4,599.41 1,500.00 3,500.00 8,725.00 1,500.00 Sub Total cc: Contingency, Fees, Permits, etc. (10%) Total $101,449.01 10,144.90 $111,593.91 Chip Jones LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANT SERVICES 3601 South Bryant Street Little Rock, AR. 72204 TO: Jackie Boykin, Director of Food Services FROM: Vernon E. Smith, Construction Manager THROUGH: Doug Kendall, Director of Plant Services DATE: March 12, 1990 SUBJECT: Renovation of Dunbar Jr. High Kitchen The following is an estimated cost for proposed renovations to the Kitchen at Dunbar Jr. High School, and items required to complete the job. DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST Partition Walls Exhaust Fan and Duct System For New Dishwasher Hot Water Heater \u0026amp; Booster Security Gate (Steel) Electrical Pantry (Wall Removal \u0026amp; Build New Shelves) $2,358.00 1,517.00 1,700.00 1,950.00 425.00 585.00 Total $8,535.00 . cc: Bob Robertson Chip Jones V-'\" To: From: Subject: Little Rock School District April 3, 1990 Office of Metropolitan Supervisor - Finance Committee 0^ A Ruth S. Steele, Superintendent Request for Determination on Allowable Desegregation Costs The Little Rock School District (LRSD) submits the following expenditure estimates on planned desegregation activities for your consideration and approval as allowable desegregation expenditures: 1. 9JJ-i-Se of Safety and SecurityExhibit I summarizes the recommendations made in the TriDistrict Desegregation Plan relative to establishing an Office of Safety and Security. The LRSD requests authorization to establish this office for the 1990-91 school year at a cost of $850,000 per year plus annual increases of approximately three percent (3%) for ongoing maintenance and operations expenses. In addition, approval is requested for a one-time capital improvements expenditure of $100,000 for renovation and modification of the former LRSD Transportation building located at 21st and Barber Streets so that this facility might be used as headquarters for the Office of Safety and Security. 2, a description of the science magnet program which was initiated in 1989-90 in accordance with Volume I of the LRSD Desegregation Plan dated January 31, 1989. Implementation costs for the second year of the program are estimated at $180,000 for one-time facilities expansion/im-provement and $70,000 per year for personnel costs. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361 It is respectfully requested that a decision be given on these requests by April 16, 1990 so that necessary actions can be taken on a schedule that will enable programs to be in place by the beginning of the 1990-91 school year. RSS:nr Encl. Exhibit I Exhibit II Security Parkview Science Magnet SchoolExhibit I - Tri District Desenregation Plan - January 2, 1990 SECURITY SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS In the many meetings and forums held throughout Little Rock and Pulaski County last fall, a recurring theme was the concern of parents, black and white, about school safety and security. These themes involved apprehension about the safety of children in and around schools. and with black parents and community members. concern about the disproportionate numbers of black students suspended and expelled, particularly black male students. School programs in desegregated settings will suffer greatly if positive discipline policies aren't consistently and equitably enforced. Parents and community members must be involved in the preparation of programs to deal with this important problem. Staff development involving human relations, prejudice reduction. and discipline is an essential element of any program. The districts have included in their plans excellent suggestions regarding codes of conduct, security forces, and parent and community involvement. These plans must go forward in addition to recommendations contained in this report. The school principal is the key to this effort. School principals must be concerned about the safety of children in and around schools. and their leadership is essential in providing a safe school environment for children. For this reason, selection of school principals, inservice training in the area of discipline 14 . Establish a school-based student attendance incentive system at each school. discipline and 5. Activate discipline/attendance intervention teams at schools. Mandate that the pupil services team will do monitoring and involve the counselor with students who have discipline/attendance problems. 6. Involve parents in the team process regarding their children through meetings/conferences. 7. Establish discipline-review committee and sub-committees to include principals, staff, patrons, students, and at least one Board member to review discipline data and recommend modifications to ensure equity of policies and policy administration. The committee will be involved in the process of analysis of data and planning for reducing disparities in discipline. 8. Appoint a joint committee with Pulaski County Special School District and North Little Rock School District to coordinate discipline policies. 9. Put in place alternatives to suspension across the district with at least one such intervention to be placed at each school. Safety and Security To parents whose children may be attending school in a part of the community that is unfamiliar to them, the issue of safety and security is extremely important. The Little Rock School District Board of Directors is determined to have safe, secure schools for children. Therefore, the following are proposed: 1. Establish an Office of Safety and Security with a coordinator and approximately thirty safety supervisors who will patrol campuses. follow and/or ride school buses, and perform other duties intended to protect the safety and security of school children. Salaries for safety supervisors will be in the $20,000 range. 2. Establish by 1990-91 a two-run bus system. thus eliminating a system requiring junior high students to begin their school day at 9:40 a.m. 12Exhibit II - Little Rock School District Proposed Desegregation Plan - January 31, 1989 PARKVIEW SCIENCE MAGNET SCHOOL Overview Parkview became\n ' 1987-88 school year, arts, drama, and dance the fine arts an interdistrict Fine Arts Magnet School for the A specialized curriculum in music, is part of the magnet program. visual program has attracted for the 1988-89 school 1 students short of capacity. Although approximately 815 students y3r, the school plant is still over 150 In anticipation of the facility , -----i--.-J . wii pa u xuil UX remaining undercapacity in the future and to provid ror students graduating from the Mann Math/Scien\u0026lt; e continuity and science a Sve^ a Ptoposed. The program will be phased In foir^in^ f 100-150 tenth grade students dents Wil 1 class. similar number of tenth grade stu- ? added during year two and year three of the school with a final enrollment of 300-400 students. school is proposed, three year period with rorming the initial class. A The Parkview Science Magnet School has the following goals: 1. To provide a science curriculum that exceeds the regul science program in depth and breadth. ar 2. To increase student understanding in the science content that IS prereoTjisite to a __ r_ . that IS prerequisite to a pre-professional course of study in medicine or health. or technical 3. To increase student acquisition of laboratory techniques in science. skills and 4 . To develop skills in information acquisition cessing, statistical analysis?- rtecto?r:S?ingr\" 5. To increase the Russian to the curriculum. foreign language offerings by adding ri mi 1 nm 6. To provide opportunities for health-science professionals health-science site, site. students to interact with through field trips to the .4. ,, presentations at the school fessional^ student shadowing of the health-science pro- i co o lUildlS I Program Design specialProgram will combine the District's high tech paS siSen?iT^  curriculum tLt wli? premajor in th\ntechnical wodld potentially maS exrpiirrS- students who of undergraduate providers washout\" blocks. After consulting with the University microbiology and organic chemistry Little Rock,  -------------care providers \"wash out\" programs because of a major stumbling of Arkansas at were identified few -lluas courses with traditionally high failure rates in undergraduate health-science Students fail these courses because of programs. a lack of mastery of the prerequisite content and skills. The magnet program will serve to strengthen the students' knowledge and skills in these and other critical areas. A. Organizational Structure/Operations Parkview Science Magnet School will be phased in over a three year period of time. In 1989-90 one hundred to one hundred and fifty (100-150) student seats will be available for tenth grade. in 1990-91 one hundred to one In hundred and fifty student seats will be added to eleventh grade to accommodate the rising tenth grade students. A similar number of seats will be added for twelfth grade in 1991-1992, bringing the total capacity to 300-450. The exact total (100-150) 300-450. capacity will complement the enrollment figures/projections for the Fine Arts Magnet program. The seven period day currently in place at Parkview will need to continue to allow students the rime to take the specialty courses in the curriculum. The Science Magnet School will utilize the administrative team and teaching staff that already Magnet School. * ' ' ' serve the Fine Arts - A part time Russian teacher will be the only additional staff member needed for the In 1989-90 an additional science teacher and Technical Writing teacher will be needed. 1988-89 school term. a part time , - ------------- Additional staff requests beyond 1989-90 will be based upon enrollment. The Parkview Science Magnet School will with the University of Arkansas cl L__:__ Sciences and the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences to provide unique experiences for students. Both Universities have expressed work cooperatively at Little Rock College of B. for a willingness to host student groups for special laboratory investigations and guest lec- riiroe a 4- 4- U r i ~ J -.   j j____ .__________ _ tures at the University Campuses, and to send university personnel to the school site for special lectures and/or demonstrations. The University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences will provide some individual \"shadowing\" experiences where a student follows and works    fessional for a period of time. The University of Arkansas with a health-care proParkview Science Magnet . , - will meet annually with personnel representing the College of Sciences at UALR and the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences to plan specific activities and strategies for the upcoming school year. School staff the Curriculum Design/Course Offerings The Little Rock School District non-science senior high curriculum will be combined with the District's high tech science courses and a science component to form the program or studies for Parkview Science Magnet School. District - _ 117The following program of study is required for high school graduation: Required Graduation Requirements (Grades 9-12) English (4 units) Social Studies (3 units) Mathematics and Science (5 units) Physical Education (1/2 unit) Health Education (1/2 unit) Vocational Education (1 unit) Fine Arts (1/2 unit) Computer Education The science magnet special course offerings are as follows: Biological Science 1. 2. 3. 4 . 5. Biolab (1 year) (existing District high tech course) Microbiology (1 semester) (new course) Human Anatomy and Physiology (1 semester) (new course) Environmental Health (1 semester) (new course) AP Biology (existing course) Physical Science 1. 2. 3. 4 . Chemtech (1 year) (existing District high tech course) Qualitative Analysis (1 semester) (new course) Organic Chemistry (1 semester) (new course) Physics (1 year) (existing course with slight modifications to emphasize medicine and health applications) Mathematics/Science Skill Courses 1. 2. Applied Statistics (1 semester) (new course) Technical Writing (1 semester) (new course) Mathematics (all are existing or proposed District courses) 1. 2. 3. 4 . 5. Geometry (1 year) Algebra II (1 year) Advanced Algebra and Trigonometry (1 year) Calculus AB (1 year) Calculus BC (1 year) - . 118Foreian Lancruaae 1. 2. 3 . Russian I, II (1 year) (new course) German I, II, III, IV (1 year) (existing course) Latin I, II, III (1 year) (existing course) Recfuired and Elective Non-specialtv Courses Non-specialty courses required for graduation and free elective courses will be selected from the District's full Program Parkview High School of Studies offered at Program ReoTJirements Biolab (1 year) required in the tenth grad Chemtech (1 year) required eleventh grade e in the tenth or Physics (1 year) required in the eleventh or twelfth grade Applied Statistics (1 semester) required in the eleventh or twelfth grade Technical Writing (1 semester) required in the eleventh or twelfth grade Two (2) semester electives must be chosen from Microbiology, Human Anatomy and Physiology, and Environmental Health in grades 10-12. One U) semester elective must be chosen from Qualitative Analysis and Organic Chemistry in grades 11-12. AP Biology may be elected grade. in the twelfth Two (2) years of foreign language must be chosen from either Russian, German, or Latin in grades 10-12. Mathematics must be taken each 10-12. year, grades All students will complete a science research project each year. All students will complete a 3 hour \"of a health-science professional during the twelfth grade. shadowing\" a 3 The following sample schedules are for illustrative only: purposes 119Sample Schedule A Sample Schedule B Grade 10 (PE, Health, Vocational Education, and Algebra II were taken in the ninth grade) 1. 2 . 3 , 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . English Social Studies Geometry Foreign Language Biolab Chemtech General Elective (PE, Health, Vocational Education were not taken in the ninth grade) 1. 2. 3. 4 . 5. 6 . 7 . English Social Studies Geometry PE/Health Vocational Biolab Foreign Lang^uage Grade 11 1. 2. 3. 4. 5 . 6 . 7 . English Social Studies Trigonometry and Advanced Algebra Qualitative Analysis/Fine Arts Survey Foreign Language Physics General Elective 1. 2. 3 . 4 . 5. 6 . 7. English Social Studies Algebra II Fine Arts Survey/ Anatomy \u0026amp; Physiology Chemtech Applied Statistics/ Technical Writing General Elective Grade 12 1. 2. 3. 4 . 5. 6. 7 . English Calculus Advanced Biology Anatomy and Physiology/ Environmental Health Applied Statistics/ Technical Writing General Elective General Elective 1. 2. 3. 4 . 5. 6. 7. English Advanced Algebra/ Trigonometry Foreign Language Physics Qualitative Analysis/Organic Chemistry Microbiology/ Environmental Health General Elective Staff Development The instructional staff will ment and sSJ? a participate in curriculum develop- TSouchout development activities during the summer of 1989. to provide thJ ' inservice programs will be conducted to provide the staff with subject specific content and ski] 1c\nand litate^the^deVstrategies and skills that will faci- narc delivery of the science curriculum. UALR and GAMS J X . .--------------------- Consultants from will be used to assist with staff development. Parent Involvement Parents and participating students will understanding of the rules of the program'. sign a contract assuring X .,  school and participation in the Hoc' X will be expected to attend designated Pta ''  ----------- a limited number of meetings and other special events. 120Physical Facilities Space will be needed in the second , , ----------- year of the prooram for research laboratory/technical writing lab. use as writing lab. The room will house hou^^h! fragile instrumentation in science and will house the computers needed for the technical writing also course. Evaluation Evaluation for the ovaxudtion ror the science magnet school will be tied directlv tn ahH  mom coring team from the District' and Testing Department\n- dent questionnaire\n(:\n teview or such records^ and reco?S of trips, speakers, science fairs, J Information will be gathered. and assessed throughout guest experiences. luation report will Directors. ------- s Evaluation (2) a teacher questionnaire\n, - . (3) a stu- a parent questionnaire\n(5) an admi- (6) a review of pertinent documents behavioral records, (4) (5) science and \"shadowing\" , - ------ reviewed, analyzed, the school year and a summative eva- be presented annually to the Board of a summative to the Board 121April 18, 1990 To: From: Subject: OFFICE OF THE METROPOLITAN SUPERVISOR 201 E. MARKHAM, SUITE 510 HERITAGE WEST BUILDING LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Dr. Ruth Steele, Superintendent, Little Rock School District Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor LRSD Requests for Determination on Allowable Desegregation Costs We have received your correspondance of March 21 and April 3, 1990, requesting a determination of allowable desegregation costs in reference to items discussed under the headings of \"Curriculum Audit,\" \"Two-Run Bus System,\" II High School Facilities,\" \"Office of Safety and Security, II Dunbar Junior and \"Parkview Science Magnet School.\" on Monday, April 16, 1990. We discussed your requests with the Finance Advisory Committee The Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor, with the advisement of the Finance Commi ttee. expects to thoroughly assess all requests for desegregation expenditures to determine whether they are appropriate and consistent with the spirit and the letter of the desegregation plan. However, at this time, with the work of the Deloitte and Touche firm still underway, we do not have information sufficient to enable us to determine whether any potential expenditure is reasonable and allowable. We will use the results of the Deloitte and Touche analysis and recommendations as a basis for identifying procedural and decisionmaking guidelines with which we will operate in the future in regard to desegregation expenditures.OFFICE OF THE METROPOLITAM SUPERVISOR 201 E. MARKHAM, SUITE 510 HERITAGE WEST BUILDING LITTLE ROCK. AR 72201 April 19, 1990 To: From: Subject: Members of the Finance Advisory Committee Ann S. Brown, Associate Metropolitan Supervisor Memo to LRSD Regarding Requests for Determination on Allowable Desegregation Costs Attached for your information is a copy of the memo that was sent from this office to Dr. Ruth Steele, pursuant to our Finance Committee meeting on April 16, 1990. The three Associate Metropolitan Supervisors trust that this correspondence conveys the concensus of opinion from our meeting. serving not only as acknowledgment of the LRSD requests, but also making a reasonable statement regarding our inability to act on any desegregation funding requests until we have had an opportunity to review the findings and recommendations of Deloitte \u0026amp; Touch. Enc.To: From: Subject: Little Rock School District April 19, 1990 Office of Metropolitan Supervisor - Finance Committee^^ Ruth S. Steele, Superintendent Request for Determination of Allowable Desegregation Costs (No. 3) The Tri-District Desegregation Plan provides for the hiring of at least one additional parent recruiter and one data entry operator for the Student Assignment Office of the Little Rock School District. Exhibit 1 describes duties that will be performed by these individuals. Estimated annual costs of salaries, benefits, and other expenses for the two positions will be in the range of $51,000 to $55,000. These personnel are needed immediately to accommodate implementation of the long-term student assignment plan. Your favorable consideration and approval of these costs as allowable desegregation expenses at the earliest practical date will be appreciated. RSS:nr Attachment: Exhibit I - Tri-District Desegregation Plan dated January 2, 1990 QJ.f.l.ce Student Assignment * -r 810 West Markham Street * * v\u0026gt; Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361 Exhibit I - Tri-District Desegregation Plan - January 2, 1990 Student Assignment Office\nThe Student Assignment Office will monitor new assignments, process all data entry work for elementary schools, process interdistrict majority-to-minority transfers and magnet assignments, reassign students because of over-crowdedness or desegregation requirements, consider appeals, verify addresses. conduct recruitment efforts, maintain waiting lists, and process desegregation transfers. The Student Assignment Office will also be responsible for incentive school and kindergarten assignments. The Student Assignment Office will be reorganized and extra personnel will be added to provide temporary and/or permanent support. At least one parent recruiter and one data entry operator will be added on a permanent basis. These individuals will be needed to accommodate the additional magnet, incentive school, and pre-kindergarten options that will be created by the long-term student assignment plan. Address Changes: All students will be required to report address changes immediately to the school's main office. Students who change addresses will have the option (if space is available and the assignment complies with desegregation requirements) to attend their new attendance zone schools or to remain at their current schools. The district will not be responsible for transportation if students elect to remain at their current schools. 16Downtown Early Childhood Center May 11, 1990 Page two In order for the District to open the Center for the 1990-91 school year, i.t_ must commit withing five working days (by May 18) to a lease agreement. The current occupant needs time to locate new space, remodel and move by August 6, 1990 to allow the district time to open the Center by the beginning of school. The building is well-suited for an early childhood program. Most of its walls are movable so that renovation requirements are minor\na separate lot will provide an outdoor play area\noff-street parking is generous\nand access to downtown and to the freeways is strategic. The total square footage of the building itself (not including play areas and parking) is 5,500 or $9.82 per foot, which is very competitive for downtown office space. The committee also considered: --Bushman Court Reporting Building (6th and Pulaski, $3,169 per month. 6,500 sq. feet). This was the committee's second choice\nhowever, in order to use the building for an early childhood program would require extensive and expensive remodeling, this expense would be prudent. The committee did not feel that --Olympia Publishing Building (900 West Fourth, $2,000 per month, 3,400 sq. feet). The committee believes the space would not be adequate for the Center and that it would be difficult to occupy in time for the 1990-91 school year. --SE Corner (3rd and Ringo, $3,000 per month, 3,600 sq. feet). committee believes the space would not be adequate for the Center. Again the Seat Allocation According to the Tri-District Desegregation Plan, \"the districts will work together to establish a pre-kindergarten program in the downtown Little Rock business area.\" As a result, seats will be allocated for downtown employees from each of the three districts in Pulaski County -- Little Rock School District, North Little Rock School District, and Pulaski County Special School District. The Downtown Early Childhood Center will have three four-year old classes dur- ing the 1990-91 school year. Each class will have a maximum of 20 students. The seat allocation formula for the interdistrict magnet schools will be used to allocate the 60 four-year old seats among the three districts. LRSD NLRSD PCSSD 45.6% 15.7% 38.7% 27 seats 10 seats 23 seats OLittle Rock School District May 11, 1990 TO: FROM: Ann Brown, Prentice Dupins, and Arma Hart - Associate Metropolitan Supervisors Chip Jones, Manager of Support Services _ James Jennings, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation ^(5 Monitoring and Program Development THROUGH:^l)r. Herb Cleek, Deputy Superintendent of Schools 0)^Dr. Ruth Steele, Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Downtown Early Childhood Center Site Selection The planning committee for the downtown early childhood center (the Center) has located a site that will be a showcase of the four-year old program in the Little Rock School District. The selected site is currently owned by Cashion and Company. The district has negotiated a price of $4,500 per month for the location contingent upon approval by the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor. Current cost estimates for the total program are as follows: Rent Utilities 3 teachers 3 aides 1 custodian 1 coordinator 1 secretary Benefits Food Service Material \u0026amp; Supplies Postage Furniture \u0026amp; Equipment Renovations Contingency $54,000 10,000 75,000 30,000 9,000 20,000 12,000 21,900 15,000 3,000 500 20,000 (Start-up) 20,000 (Start-up) 30,000 $320,400 The committee recommends that funding for the Center be similar to the Magnet Schools. Each participating district will be responsible for the costs of the Center based on seat allocation. It is further recommended that the participating districts be allowed to use the Settlement proceeds to pay for the Center. O 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361 Downtown Early Childhood Center May 11, 1990 Page three Assignment Process All assignments are subject to desegregation requirements and capacity. As stated in the Tri-District Desegregation Plan, the Downtown Early Childhood Center is specifically aimed at serving the children of parents who work in the downtown area. in Pulaski County, Arkansas. However, the parent must reside in one of the three districts Act 609, Act 624, or legal transfers cannot be used for admission to the Downtown Early Childhood Center. Special publicity efforts will be used to inform downtown employees about the early childhood program. Special meetings will be held prior to the application period to inform downtown employees about the downtown early childhood program. The three districts will work together to promote and support publi- city efforts. As stated earlier, the downtown early childhood program is aimed at serving the children of parents who work in the downtown area. The downtown area i s defined as the Central Business District of Little Rock. The boundaries of this area are Interstate 30 on the east side, 15th Street on the south side, the State Capitol Mall on the west side, and Markham Street on the north side, parent's worksite must be located in this area in order for the parent to be classified as a downtown employee. The The Little Rock School District Student Assignment Office will be responsible for processing all applications. In order to be eligible for admission, the child must be four years old on or before October 1, 1990. Parents must present a birth certificate and proof of address during the application process. A lottery will be conducted if demand exceeds the supply of seats for a parti- cular district. Students who are not selected will be placed on a waiting list for the remainder of the school year, each year. A new waiting list will be developed Hours of Operation The Downtown Early Childhood Center will have the same opening and closing time as a regular elementary school. In addition to the normal hours of operation, parents will have the option to participate in the before and after school care program. Office. The costs will be determined by the Little Rock School District CARE CARE services also will be provided during holidays. Transportation The three districts will not provide transportation. ODowntown Early Childhood Center May 11, 1990 Page four Curriculum The goals and objectives of the educational program wi 1T be sensitive to the developmental characteristics of the children. The curriculum will be based on young children's interests and styles of learning which will guide daily activities. The program itself will be compatible with the developmental needs of young children. the joy of learning. It win appeal to young children an help them experience The early childhood program will be multicultural in focus and sensitive to the cultural and ethnic heritages of children. to learn about themselves and other cultures. Young children need the opportunity An appropriate curriculum for young children will be one in which the children are active learners. They will be given freedom to act on materials, to use them in their own ways, to move about and to interact verbally and physically with other children and with their teachers. There will be a full spectrum of activities to stimulate children with many levels of development. Children will be offered choices and will select many of their own activities in learning areas: keeping, and music. children to explore and manipulate. blocks, science, math, games, puzzles, books, art, house- There will be many concrete materials in each area for Teachers are expected to facilitate the development of self-control in children by using positive guidance techniques. havior are a part of the classroom management program. Modeling and encouraging expected be- Children will have many opportunities to develop social skills such as cooperating, helping, and talking with other children, the staff, and resource persons. Children will be provided many experiences which lead to literacy: listening, drawing, and copying. Such activities facilitate language talking. and fine motor development. Listening to stories, telling about pictures. poetry, fingerplays, field trips, dictating stories, and participating in dramatic play all provide a foundation for beginning literacy. Formal reading and writing instruction is reserved for a more developmentally appropriate time. Implementation Plan Since the Center is required by the Tri-District Desegregation Plan, the Little Rock School District plans to implement the recommendations of the committee as described herein. Please advise us before May 18, 1990 if the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor is not in agreement with this decision so that other plans might be developed. The North Little Rock and the Pulaski County Special School Districts have been provided a copy of this memorandum. cc: Billy Bowles, PCSSD Bobby Acklin, NLRSD OTO: FROM: Little Rock School District May 11, 1990  V Ann Brown, Prentice Dupins, and Arma Hart - Associate Metropolitan Supervi sors Chip Jones, Manager of Support Services James Jennings, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation Monitoring and Program Development THROUGH:l?^br. Herb Cleek, Deputy Superintendent of Schools ^Dr. Ruth Steele, Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Downtown Early Childhood Center Site Selection The planning committee for the downtown early childhood center (the Center) has located a site that will be a showcase of the four-year old program in the Little Rock School District. The selected site is currently owned by Cashion and Company. The district has negotiated a price of $4,500 per month for the location contingent upon approval by the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor. Current cost estimates for the total program are as follows: Rent Utilities 3 teachers 3 aides 1 custodian 1 coordinator 1 secretary Benefits Food Service Material \u0026amp; Supplies Postage Furniture \u0026amp; Equipment Renovations Contingency $54,000 10,000 75,000 30,000 9,000 20,000 12,000 21,900 15,000 3,000 500 20,000 (Start-up) 20,000 (Start-up) 30,000 $320,400 The committee recommends that funding for the Center be similar to the Magnet Schools. Each participating district will be responsible for the costs of the Center based on seat allocation. It is further recommended that the parti ci- pating districts be allowed to use the Settlement proceeds to pay for the Center. 810 West Narkham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361Downtown Early Childhood Center May 11, 1990 Page two In order for the District to open the Center for the 1990-91 school year, it must commit withing five working days (by May 18) to a lease agreement. The current occupant needs time to locate new space, remodel and move by August 6, 1990 to allow the district time to open the Center by the beginning of school. The building is well-suited for an early childhood program. Most of its walls are movable so that renovation requirements are minor\na separate lot will provide an outdoor play area\noff-street parking is generous\nand access to downtown and to the freeways is strategic. The total square footage of the building itself (not including play areas and parking) is 5,500 or $9.82 per foot, which is very competitive for downtown office space. The committee also considered: --Bushman Court Reporting Building (6th and Pulaski, $3,169 per month, 6,500 sq. feet). This was the committee's second choice\nhowever, in order to use the building for an early childhood program would require extensive and expensive remodeling, this expense would be prudent. The committee did not feel that --Olympia Publishing Building (900 West Fourth, $2,000 per month, 3,400 sq. feet). The committee believes the space would not be adequate for the Center and that it would be difficult to occupy in time for the 1990-91 school year. --SE Corner (3rd and Ringo, $3,000 per month, 3,600 sq. feet). committee believes the space would not be adequate for the Center. Again the Seat Allocation According to the Tri-District Desegregation Plan, \"the districts will work together to establish a pre-kindergarten program in the downtown Little Rock business area.\" As a result, seats will be allocated for downtown employees from each of the three districts in Pulaski County  Little Rock School District, North Little Rock School District, and Pulaski County Special School District. The Downtown Early Childhood Center will have three four-year old classes during the 1990-91 school year. Each class will have a maximum of 20 students. The seat allocation formula for the interdistrict magnet schools will be used to allocate the 60 four-year old seats among the three districts. LRSD NLRSD PCSSD 45.6% 15.7% 38.7% 27 seats 10 seats 23 seats ODowntown Early Childhood Center May 11, 1990 Page three Assignment Process All assignments are subject to desegregation requirements and capacity. As stated in the Tri-District Desegregation Plan, the Downtown Early Childhood Center is specifically aimed at serving the children of parents who work in the downtown area. in Pulaski County, Arkansas. However, the parent must reside in one of the three districts Act 609, Act 624, or legal transfers cannot be used for admission to the Downtown Early Childhood Center. Special publicity efforts will be used to inform downtown employees about the early childhood program. Special meetings will be held prior to the application period to inform downtown employees about the downtown early childhood program. city efforts. The three districts will work together to promote and support publi- As stated earlier, the downtown early childhood program is aimed at serving the children of parents who work in the downtown area. fined as the Central Business District of Little Rock. The downtown area i s deThe boundaries of this area are Interstate 30 on the east side, 15th Street on the south side, the State Capitol Mall on the west side, and Markham Street on the north side, parent's worksite must be located in this area in order for the parent to be classified as a downtown employee. The The Little Rock School District Student Assignment Office will be responsible for processing all applications. In order to be eligible for admission, the child must be four years old on or before October 1, 1990. Parents must present a birth certificate and proof of address during the application process. A lottery will be conducted if demand exceeds the supply of seats for a particular district. Students who are not selected will be placed on a waiting list for the remainder of the school year, each year. A new waiting list will be developed Hours of Operation The Downtown Early Childhood Center will have the same opening and closing time as a regular elementary school. In addition to the normal hours of operation, parents will have the option to participate in the before and after school care program. Office. The costs will be determined by the Little Rock School District CARE CARE services also will be provided during holidays. Transportation The three districts will not provide transportation. ODowntown Early Childhood Center May 11, 1990 Page four Curriculum The goals and objectives of the educational program will be sensitive to the developmental characteristics of the children. The curriculum will be based on young children's interests and styles of learning which will guide daily activities. The program itself will be compatible with the developmental needs of young children, the joy of learning. It will appeal to young children an help them experience The early childhood program will be multicultural in focus and sensitive to the cultural and ethnic heritages of children. to learn about themselves and other cultures. Young children need the opportunity An appropriate curriculum for young children will be one in which the children are active learners. They will be given freedom to act on materials, to use them in their own ways, to move about and to interact verbally and physically with other children and with their teachers. There will be a full spectrum of activities to stimulate children with many levels of development. Children will be offered choices and will select many of their own activities in learning areas: keeping, and music. children to explore and manipulate. blocks, science, math, games, puzzles, books, art, house- There will be many concrete materials in each area for Teachers are expected to facilitate the development of self-control in children by using positive guidance techniques. havior are a part of the classroom management program. Modeling and encouraging expected beChildren will have many opportunities to develop social skills such as cooperating, helping, and talking with other children, the staff, and resource persons. Children will be provided many experiences which lead to literacy: listening, drawing, and copying. and fine motor development. Such activities facilitate language talking. Listening to stories, telling about pictures. poetry, fingerplays, field trips, dictating stories, and participating in dramatic play all provide a foundation for beginning literacy. Formal reading and writing instruction is reserved for a more developmentally appropriate time. Implementation Plan Since the Center is required by the Tri-District Desegregation Plan, the Little Rock School District plans to implement the recommendations of the committee as described herein. Please advise us before May 18, 1990 if the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor is not in agreement with this decision so that other plans might be developed. The North Little Rock and the Pulaski County Special School Districts have been provided a copy of this memorandum. cc: Billy Bowles, PCSSD Bobby Acklin, NLRSD Osg| OFFICE OF METROPOLITAN SUPERVISOR 201 EAST MARKHAM, SUITE 510 HERITAGE WEST BUILDING LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 STAFF/LRSD MEETING May 25, 1990 AGENDA 1. Area Schools 2. Deseg Requirement for Kindergarten 3. Extracurricular Activities Cheerleader/Drill Team Try-Outs 4. Magnet Schools 5. Incentive Schools 6. Hiring of Principals 7. Downtown Early Childhood 8. Early Childhood Education Report 9. Committee Procedure 10. Timeline for Monitoring Instrument 11. Other Deloitte \u0026amp; Touche 111 Center Street, Suite 1800 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-4420 Telephone: (501) 374-0206 Facsimile: (501) 374-4809 May 11, 1990 Ms. Ann Brown Office of Metropolitan Supervisor Heritage West Building 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Ms. Brown: Deloitte \u0026amp; Touche is pleased to respond to your request for a brief summarization of the areas we suggest for policy establishment resulting from the procedures that we were engaged to perform for the late Mr. Eugene Reville, Metropolitan Supervisor. Our procedures were performed in accordance with the proposal letter submitted to Mr. Reville on March 7, 1990. Deloitte \u0026amp; Touche School District (the visited the administrative offices M May 11, 1990. District\") during the period of April 9, of the Little Rock 1990, Our primary contacts at the District were Chip Jones, to Milhollen, James Jennings and Estelle Mathis, of the following desegregation plans: Mark The District provided copies February 16, 1988, Master\". Interim Report and Recommendations of the Special Volume 1 of the \"Little Rock School Plan\", dated January 31, 1989. District Proposed Desegregation \"Tri-District Desegregation Plan\". The District also provided an analysis of the Desegregation Account (Fund 13 on their accounting records). This analysis presented the desegregation costs of the District for the 1988-89 school year that were claimed as costs to be reimbursed by the U.S. District Court (the \"i desegregation settlement agreement. Court\") as part of the The total cost presented is $5,471,069. The costs were summarized by school and by major desegregation program\nPAL, Homework Centers, Extended Day Care, Early Childhood Education, Enhancement Schools and an Other cost category.After reading the information above and other related information provided and after analyzing various supporting documentation for desegregation program related expenditures, we held discussions with various individuals including District administrative and school personnel, staff of the office of the Metropolitan Supervisor and Court personnel. The target beneficiaries and the nature of costs were generally found to be as represented by the District. In our analysis of costs we noted no situations which were not supported by adequate documentation. Based on these procedures, we believe that the following areas for policy establishment should be addressed. Future Desegregation Plans Require guidelines desegregation programs. for budget information to supplement the Require guidelines for the format of financial information. Require guidelines for the preparation of the program implementation timetables. Determination of an Amendment Process Develop a formal process to document changes in the desegregation plan and the related budgeted amounts. Financial Reporting Process Require required. guidelines to describe the types of financial reports Require the presentation of the District's total desegregation expenditures, not only those related to the Court desegregation fund. Require comparison of budgeted expenditures to actual expenditures. Require explanations of budget variances. Determine the frequency of financial reporting. Establish an Evaluation Process Determine the criteria that are needed to measure the effectiveness of the desegregation plan and each program within the plan. Determine the reports that the District should prepare to provide those criteria. Determine the frequency of the reporting. 2We understand that you wish to avoid the additional incurred in our preparing a detailed report. cost that would be As you requested, we have only prepared a brief listing of the areas where certain policy decisions to be necessary. appear We understand that you believe our previous meetings with you in which we presented the specific details of our findings provided sufficient detailed information to you and that, in light of the previous detailed discussions, an in-depth written report is not necessary. As we communicated previously, we will be pleased to provide such details to you again, verbally or in writing. We appreciate this opportunity to serve you and believe that the accounting rules and procedures that are developed as a result of these various policy decisions will provide the necessary framework to monitor and control the desegregation expenditures in the future, further assistance in establishing policy. Our firm would be pleased to be of Sincerely, 3OFFICE OF THE METROPOLITAN SUPERVISOR 201 EAST MARKHAM, SUITE 510 HERITAGE WEST BUILDING LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 August 24, 1990 To: Bobby Lester, Superintendent, PCSSD James Smith, Superintendent, NLRSD Ruth Steele, Superintendent, LRSD From: '^Ann Brown, Associate Metropolitan Supervisor CZy.Arma Hart, Associate Metropolitan Supervisor Subject: 1990-91 Budget: Salary Adjustments On July 30, 1990, a letter was sent from this office to the financial directors of each school district regarding the 1990-91 budget for the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor. As stated in that correspondence, we will continue to operate on the same budget total that was approved by Judge Henry Woods for the 1989-90 fiscal year. In accordance with an agreement with the late Eugene Reville, employees of the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor are to suffer no financial loss as a result of their temporary employment move from a school district to this office. Anytime there is a salary increase for employees in one of the school districts which has previously been the \"home\" district of a Metropolitan employee, that staff member is to automatically receive the same salary increases as employees in the home district. Our agreement with Mr. Reville also specified that salary adjustments would be made after negotiations between the districts and the unions are completed. According to news reports, the Pulaski County districts have reached salary agreements with their employees. At this time, compensation at the rate commensurate with the salary increase settlement reached in the Pulaski County Special School District has been made to the former Associate Metropolitan Supervisor whose home district has been the PCSSD. However, compensation corranensurate with both the retroactive and current salary increase settlements reached in the Little Rock School District has not been received by the three employees (both current Associate Metropolitan Supervisors and our Administrative Assistant) whose home district is the LRSD. You will note from the attached copy of our July 30 memo that the budget will accommodate such salary increases for the Metropolitan staff without any additional cost to the di stricts. Since Judge Woods' order of July 6, 1990, clearly bars retaliation against any member of the Metropolitan Supervisor's staff, we believe that the failure to receive the adjustment in salary is inadvertent. correcting this oversight will be appreciated. Your immediate attention to Thank you.OFFICE OF METROPOLITAN SUPERVISOR 201 EAST MARKHAM, SUITE 510 HERITAGE WEST BUILDING LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 November 6, 1990 TO: Dr. Ruth Steele, Superintendent Little Rock School District FROM: oily Ramer, Administrative Assistant THROUGH: .rma Hart, Associate Metropolitan Supervisor SUBJECT: 1990-91 Interim Budget With Judge Wright's Order of October 30th approving our 1990-91 interim budget, I am in the process of determining each district's contribution for that budget and bringing my books up-to-date, need to be followed to complete this process: The following steps 1. 2. LRSD send to this office a print-out determining the exact amount due LRSD for the 1989-90 retroactive pay for Ann Brown, Airma Hart, and Polly Ramer. LRSD send to this office a print-out determining the exact amount due LRSD for the 1990-91 retroactive pay for Ann Brown, Arma Hart, and Polly Ramer. 3. Using the above infoznnation. OMS pro-rate and credit the remaining 1989-90 budget against the districts 1990-91 budget contributions. 4. The three school districts cut checks for the amount due OMS for the 1990-91 budget. 5. OMS cut a check for the to-date reimbursement due LRSD for salary, travel allowance, and benefits for Ann Brown, Arma Hart, and Polly Ramer for 1990-91. 6. Monthly the OMS cut checks for reimbursement of salary, travel allowance, and benefit payments for Ann Brown, Airma Hart, and Polly Ramer. As you see by the above steps, the completion of the 1990-91 budget process cannot begin until this office receives the print-out of the retroactive pay. greatly appreciated. Whatever may be done to expedite this process will be with you or Mark Milhollen, if you so desire. If any questions arise, I will be glad to meet Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. 09/17'90 15:26 301 374 7609 L R School Dlst  001 n ECCtCEBBL aw Little Rock School District September 17, 1990 TO:. Arma Hart, Ann Brown, Polly Ramer FROM: ^Ruth S. Steele SUBJECT: Salary Adjustments I have asked Chris Heller to review the issue of salary adjustments for the metropolitan supervisor's staff, and he is now doing so. As I indicated to you, Arma, in our telephone conversation on Friday, I do not believe I have the authority to give you a salary increase without being directed to do so by the Court, since you and other members of the staff are not employees of the Little Rock School District, and- since I have no authority to make budget decisions regarding the operation-of your office. A second point is' that even if I- did have such.authority,'you and Ann would not be able to receive a raise because senior level administrative employees' salaries were frozen at a level established on August 30, 1989. In effect, you have been treated in the same way as all other top level administrators in the District have been treated.- Following salary adjustments made last summer, which reflected a higher percentage for.some than for others, salaries were frozen and remain frozen as of this date.' We I hope-this helps to clarify my position regarding this matter. .... look forward to the opportunity to see a proposed budget for 1990-91 and to comment upon i-t, as I believe the Court Order which established the office requires. /bjf cc: -Chris Keller- Herb Cleek PAX - transmit l TO: jJxPyd-7 DEPT: fT WlfjLlTi Memo FROM: C0:_ PHONE: NO-OF PAGES I FAX?: Post.lt'Brand fax transmiftai memo 7S71LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK, AR May 28, 1991 Ruth Steele, Superintendent SUBJECT: In order 72201 Jones, Manager of Support Services Phase II of Capital Improvement Plan to clearly define the modification section of the plan. parameters of the facility I recommend that we send the revised capital improvement plan to Ann Brown with notations next to those approval. time lines. proj ects for which we will solicit specific court All other projects will proceed under Board approved For projects that require specific court approval. I further recommend that we be allowed to contract with an architect so that budgets can be finalized and drawings prepared for the Court's review. The amount of money from Phase I for which specific court approval has been or will be sought is $12,954,480 or 77% of the total $16,900,000 issue. Of the $15,100,000 proposed issue, $10,507,691 would require court approval or 70% of the total issue. Obviously, this approach allows the Court to have sufficient resources to monitor and control the District's general direction. Without seeking a working solution to the plan language, the Court might have to approve every capital improvement project. If the District had to take this approach, stop. facility improvements would If you approve this recommendation, I will contact Chris so that we can try to reach an agreement with Ann Brown. cc: James Jennings Doug Kendall c\n\\n)emos\\phasel I .wpdSchool Henderson Henderson Henderson J.A. Fair J.A. Fair J.A. Fair J.A. Fair J.A. Fair King Mabelvale Mabelvale Mabelvale Mabelvale Jr. Mabelvale Jr. Little Rock School District Bond Issue Application May 10, 1991 Improvements Plumbing Replacement Energy Management Site Improvements Replace Phone System Energy Management Renovate Shop Area Waterproofing Repair Emergency Lighting New School Replace fire alarm Site Improvements Emergency Lighting Roofing Site Improvements McClellan (Field House) Roofing McDermott Metropolitan Mitchell Old Carver Old Carver Otter Creek Otter Creek Parkview Pulaski Heights Pulaski Heights Pulaski Heights Pulaski Heights Pulaski Heights Jr. Rightsell Rightsell Rightsell Rightsell Stephens Southwest Jr. Terry Terry Wakefield Wakefield Site Improvements Roofing Classroom Addition -4 ' Roofing Heating Replacements Emergency Lighting Site Improvements Site Improvements Carpet and Floor Tile Fire Bells Site Improvements Intercom Repair Site Improvements Plumbing Repairs Site Improvements Classroom Addition Roofing School Replacement Classroom Addition Roofing Site Improvements Emergency Lighting Paint /Vrf- Page 2 Cost 10,000 25,000 70,000 3,000 ' 25,000 33,000 (U 5,000 4,000 1,500,000^ 12,000 20,000 21,933 30,000 3,545 30,000 97,555 65,000^ 47,032 67,000. 2,500 25,000 25,000 25,000 2,000 5,000 15,000 20,000 10,000 50,000 65,000 16,866 3,400,000* 626,000^ 89,250 15,000 6,000 30,000 Isf |5\u0026gt;^w!) (Mu(, Little Rock School District Bond Issue Application May 10, 1991 School Improvements Cost Asbestos Abatement Badgett Badgett Badgett Badgett Baseline Baseline Booker Booker Booker Brady Central Central Central Central Central Central Central Central (Gym) Cloverdale Jr. Dodd Dodd Dunbar Eastside Fair Park Fair Park Fair Park Fair Park Food Service Forest Park Forest Park Fulbright Garland Geyer Springs Gibbs Henderson Henderson Henderson District-Wide - Phase 1 Carpet and Floor Tile Energy Lighting\nRenovation Site Improvements Plumbing repairs Intercom \u0026amp; Bell Repair Emergency Lighting Seal and Waterproof windows All-Weather bus waiting area Site Improvements Site Improvements Paint Waterproof East Exterior Installation of Lang. Labs Roofing Repair Deck Carpet and Floor Tile Replace Panic Devices Electrical Repair/Improvements Major Renovation Handicapped ramps Emergency Lighting Major Renovation Roofing Site Improvements HVAC Replacement At, Paint Carpet and Floor Tile Renovation Site Improvements Underpinning kitchen area Site Improvements Additional Outside Lighting Major Renovation Replace Sewer Line Replace Rooftop HVAC Units Wall Repair Enclose Six Hall Entrances 1,000,000 10,000 11,000 2,000 10,000 3,000 15,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 15,000 127,000 30,000 126,631 5,000 25,000 8,000 5,000 3,161,160*\" 5,000 4,000 100,000 71,400 20,000 8,000 30,000 30,000 200,000 2,000 5,000 15,000 5,000 2,006,800^ 6,000 30,000 40,000 35,000 Page 1Little Rock School District Bond Issue Application May 10,1991 School Improvements Cost Wakefield Wakefield Wakefield Waston Western Hills Wilson Wilson Wilson Wilson Wilson Wilson Woodruff Site Improvements Minor Renovation-' Carpet and Floor Tile Site Improvements Major Renovation Replace Ceiling Tile Fence Repair Replace Plumbing Fixtures Replace A/C Units Roofing Carpet and Floor Tile Major Renovation Contingency 30,000 75,000 25,000 20,000 1,235,832 Z 50,000 30,000 30,000 6,000 83,475 30,000 1,024,688 491,333 Total Previous Issue 16,900,000 6^ Page 3 Sux (Ac, Little Rock School District Bond Issue Application May 10, 1991 School Improvements Cost Proposed Issue Bale Bale Bale Bale Bale Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline Booker Booker Booker Brady Brady Brady Brady Brady Brady Brady Brady Chicot Dodd Dodd Dodd Dodd Forest Heights Forest Park Forest Park Forest Park Forest Park Forest Park Forest Park Fulbright Garland Gillam Hall Hall Lighting \u0026amp; Plumbing Replace Hot Water Pipes Site Work Electrical Service Carpeting Roofing Site Improvements Electrical Service Minor Remodeling Provide vent fans Carpet and Floor Tile A/C replacements Repair Walls Ceiling repair under skylights Site Work Repair/Replace Heating System Intercom Equipment/Furnishings Carpet and Floor Tile Gutters installed New Cafetorium Sewer system Replacement Replace Wooden Building Paint Ceiling Replacement PbaserZ^ Renovation Cabinet repair Door glass replacement Carpet and Floor Tile HVAC Improvements Paint Additional Receptacles Doors for restrooms Carpet Roofing Acoustic Tile Replacement Painting 63,000 45,000 20,000 22,000 50,000 151,365 3,000 50,000 10,000 2,500 15,000 37,000 5,000 10,000 50,000 53,000 2,000 45,000 55,000 2,000 250,000\u0026gt; 15,000 80,000 e 25,000 125,000 3,867,691*' 1,000 1,500 3,000 20,000 32,000 3,000 10,000 10,000- 3TWo 25,000 Page 1School Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall IRC Ish Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson King J.A. Fair Mabelvale Mabelvale Mabelvale Mabelvale Mabelvale Jr. Mann Mann Mann McClellan McClellan McClellan McDermott McDermott Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Otter Creek Little Rock School District Bond Issue Application May 10,1991 Improvements Floor Replacement Replace Lighting Replace Plumbing Fixtures Parking/Site Work Steam Piping Heating Control Improvement New Facility Roofing Carpeting/Floor Tile Window Repair/Replacement Electrical Replacement Plumbing Replacement HVAC Replacement Cost 60,000 40,000 30,000 200,000 107,500 _ 6.5QQ ^\"\"'^,740,000^1^ 88,200 Site Work Painting New School Track Repair Roofing Paint Receptacles in Cafeteria Carpet and Floor Tile 8-10 Classroom Addition (Approx.) Plumbing Repairs School Sign Improve drainage Renovate Art/Kindergarten Areas Cafeteria Expansion Site Work Paint Carpet and Floor Tile Re-roofing Site Improvements HVAC Improvements Improved Electrical Service a* Paint Electrical Service Fence Repair Paint 60,000 60,000 150,000 140,000 250,000 50,000 40,000 2,350,000-h /.S 50,000 167,779 25,000 1,500 5,000 950,000slf 10,000 5,000 10,000 120,00^* 200,000 t Page 2 I 80,000) i 30,000 35,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 100,000 30,000 25,000 10,000 24,000 School Parkview Parkview Pulaski Heights Pulaski Heights Pulaski Heights Pulaski Heights Pulaski Heights Jr. Pulaski Heights Jr. Pulaski Heights Jr. Pulaski Heights Jr. Pulaski Heights Jr. Purchasing Romine Romine Romine Romine Terry Terry Watson Watson Watson Watson Watson Watson Williams Total Proposed Issue Little Rock School District Bond Issue Application May 10,1991 Improvements Paint Energy Management ' Replace A/C Units Roofing Paint Steam Piping Minor Renovation Roofing Additional Restroom Floor Repairs Upgrade Electrical Renovation '-CUSA. Site Improvements Carpeting and Floor Tile HVAC Replacement Roofing Repair HVAC control Replace Electrical Service Repair HVAC controls Replace Gas A/C System Carpet and Floor Tile Paint Reroofing Emergency Lighting Cafeteria Expansion Cost 35,000 20,000 12,000 5,995 40,000 150,000 50,000 19,530 5,000 2,000 15,000 50,000 45,000 15,000 215,000 I 28,98qJ 10,000 30,000 12,000 45,000 10,000 30,000 100,000 6,000 350,000 15,100,000 7ol Page 3CJJ.  _ - L-  08-'13 91 16:26 I 0301 374 7609 L R School DIst 0D5I @002/002 * i*: 3.-'\nLittle Rock School District August 13, 1991 Mr. Don Smith Thomas and Thomas Certified Public Accountants 201 . Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Don: Thomas and Thomas is authorized to release to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring current and prior year workpapers for the Little Rock School District. audi' and I If further information is needed, please let me know. Sincerely, Ruth S. Steele Superintendent of Schools RSS/ch 810 West MarRham Street  Little Roch. Arkansas 72201  {501)374-3^61 fcj - r. 08 '19 91 13:34 501 374 7609 L R School Dlst @001 I 5 '3 a TO: FROM\nRE: Little Rock School District August 19, 1991 Bob Morgan - O.D.M. Mark D. Miihollen, Controlle 4 INFORMATION REQUEST Per your telephone request of August 16, 1991, I am providing you the following information. 1. 2. Desegregation Legal Fees through 6/30/91 $2,670,897.67 1991'-92 Total Operating/Desegregation Budge' $110,109,825.00 Post-It brand fax Irani To ismtttal memo 7671 L DpL Phone? (Fax-* ~ 1 I \u0026lt;1 1 k' k 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3561 i ? xra tLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM UTTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS AUGUST 22, 1991 TO\nBOARD OF DIRECTORS cons*- L5N CONTROLLER ENI TONY WOOD, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT THROUGH\nDR. RUTH . STEELE\nSUPERINTENDENT SUBJECT\nFINANCIAL REPORTS WE RECOMMEND THAT THE FOLLOWING FINANCIAL REPORTS BE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED.LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT RECEIPTS-OPERATING. DEBT SERVICE AND DESEGREGATION FUNDS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JULY 31. 1991 APPROVED BUDGET YTD RECEIPTS REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES DELINQUENT TAXES 40% PULLBACK EXCESS TREASURERS FEE DEPOSITORY INTEREST REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS IMTCDCCT AM IM\\ZCOT^^ CMTC ATHLETIC RECEIPTS TOTAL 37,919,150 4,000,000 21,222,860 122,568 400,000 206.000 300,000 ooe\nnnn 85,000 64,480,578 4,317,766 137,590 3,157 39,653 4,498,181 REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COU^iTY GENERAL SEVERANCE TAX 117.332 _____q. 117.332 u REVENUE - STATE SOURCES MFPA SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS SETTLEMENT LOAN APPORTIONMENT VOCATIONAL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ORPHAN CHILDREN EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSPORTATION INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M ADULT EDUCATION CO.MPENSATORY EDUCATION TOTAL 23,349,349 7,637,482 4,500,000 76,190 1,612,456 577,435 9,085 450,000 3,400,000 1,300,000 660.000 602,491 44,174,488 2,000,000 50,000 4,200 2,054,200 REVENUE  OTHER SOURCES PUBLIC LAW 874 TRANSFER FROM FED. GRANTS TRANSFER FROM BOND ACCT TOrAL 44,625 90,900 1,000,000 1,135,525 0 rOTAl P.EVENUE 109,907,^923 6,552,381:\\uii PAiGGSCNG .'SSCSS 129ES7CS PLANT SERVICES SUBTOTAL  690.000 ECNC ISSUE PURCHASING CONTINGENCY subtotal LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND .ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JULY 31, 1991 ScG oALANCc 07-01-91 7,714.24 53 651 32 61,365.56 95.425.30 26,959 12 122.254 92 5 -^lO 000 SONO ISSUE ENERGY GRANT 74.942.65 AiR CONCri NIN3 15,352.43 SUBTOTAL 9C.295 13 5 154 '0'3 DUNBAR CC'NTINGENC':' 139.833.50 1.629.018 67 ii'iCCyic 1991 -93 0 co 0 CO 0 CO I rv^,'! c^\\, SALANCc 1991-93 1991-93 07-31-91 7,714 24 53,651.32 0.00 0 CO 0.30 c.oo 0 00 . 495.00 495.00 61,365.56 95.425.80 26.959 12 -122 384 92 74,942 65 14,857.43 89.300.13 subtotal 1.767 852 37 0.00 0.00 0.00 139,833.50 1.623,018 87 1,767,852.37 c.SOJ.OOO 3OND ISSUE CENTRAL 21.981.59 11.622.00 TROPOLITAN 16.725.03 PARKVIEW 21.087.73 BOOKER 23.014 60 DUNBAR 12,520.25 10,359.59 16,725 03 21,087.78 23.014.60 12.520 25 FAIR 54,944.13 MDCHELL PULASKI HGTS 65.000.00 20,000.00 24,342.00 2.500.00 54,944.13 40,658.00 17,500.00 southwest MCCLELLAN 566.307.95 4,740.66 561.627.29 783 50 783.50 HENDERSON ALT LEARNING CENTER 150,241 47 63.143.0.3 CLOVERDALE JR CLOVERDALE ELEM 1,537,377.50 33,562 01 40,C00.00 45,692 82 MABELVALE 32 218 77 10,044.01 5,074.00 150,241.47 68,148.03 - _ 1.532,184.68 28,518.00 27,144.77 BRADY 27,595 47 16.246.43 BADGETT 31.027 67 MCDERMOTT E.AS ELI NE 19,973 98 11 gga 73 T A.R PARK 71.752 08 FOREST PARK 2,729 00 GARLAND 2.247 19 11,349 04 31,027.67 19,973.98 11,694.73 71.752.08 2.729.00 2,247.18I r UND EQUITY-BEGINNING RE'yENUE CURRENT TAXES DELINQUENT TAX 4m\u0026gt; PULuBACK OT^GR TOTAL LOCAL MFPA VOCATIONAL TPANorCR IAI l\u0026lt;/N OTHER SETTLEMENT PRCjCEEDS SETTLEMENT LOAN I Ml. FEDERAL OTHER STATc TOTAL RE'v'ENUE \u0026amp; EOUir/ r\u0026gt;?ENDlTURES CERTIFIED NON-CERTJFiED BENEFITS DESEGREGATION PURCHASED SERVICES S'lJPLIES Si MATERiAlS CAPITAL OUTLAY dedT service OT.HER OBJECTS CO N TI T'JGE NOi' total expenditures r*jnL/Ckuui I I ciNuii'i'j LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORV FOR THE ONE MONTH PERIOD ENDING JULY 31. 1991 OPEMAl INGzliESEG BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET MAGNET ACTU/U. FOOD eri iviec RUDOfT actual SF FCIAL REVENUE BUOCiET ACTUAL CONSTHUCTION BUDGET ACTUAL 300,000 50,931 ?. IdG|9'j3 13,512,853 37,919,150 4,000,000 21.222,860 64.480.E78 23.349.349 1.612.456 3,400,000 3,792,533 7,637,482 _ 4^500,000 44,291,820 . 44 625 ___1^090^900 110,207,923 47.636,190 13,762,313 7.232,586 13,185,342 8,260,270 4,533.533 1,728,426 8,385,834 4,678,725 ____7PO,OGO 110209,825 S8,C%8 4 317 766 137.590 55.32.5 4,436,181 2,cxx\n,ooo 50,000 4.200 6,503,961 547,478 u, ',47a Gj612 3G2 190,589 553,700 120,769 370.184 649 523 253 0CO 450,183 1.475,462 234 176 24 6/3 33,745 7,115 48 935 207,84/ 5,566 560 a Cx\u0026gt;\na- 46,141 1526 2G2 421.500 3 29-1 219 312 2L? 43! W IRb.OX 1 502,31'* 73 3.545 33,171 5,024 23,280 13.225 7,049 ^/)57____ _:.2ej4:T6_. 894 .-,.2*357.4.3Q5-._ . 6,063 6.060 .3:518 7 15,044 14.847 1,385 S.74S 830,670 70.431___ 44^^9__ _ 040,416 . .469uO4Z_ i4W9L- ^35.9781306 ) )EXPEND^'TCRES WSSTcFN HILLS DCDD GEYSR SPRINGS PULASKI HGTS ELEM RIGHTSELL WILSON WOOUHU^r M'ABEL'-AuE ELEM TERRY FULBRIGHT OTTER CREEK WAKEFIELD WATS EAST SICE FOOD SERVICE ASBESTOS KING STEPHENS CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL UTTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JULY 31, 1391 EEG SALANCE 07-01-91 836.713 94 3 831 45 1,052.713.31 24.454.65 129,547.53 1.26.461.58 516,638.56 64.077 83 102.865 00 1 3 890 80 26.279 53 142.963.30 17,422 63.390.96 15 792.11 644,827 57 1.500,000,00 3 400.000.00 245.612.86 11.733.172.80 INCOME 1991-92 O.CO 15 ICO.Of0 PROPOSED ISSUE BALE o 199,472,61 ^4 4 O C C A A BOOKER BRADY CHICOT 54.500.00 222.000.00 250.000.00 TRANSESRS 1991-9C 30 009.00 EXPSNOtrURSS (70.000 00) 0.00 1991 135 318 54 358.496 87 25.679 13 115.310.03 S.437.00 22.071.76 736.565 25 644.49 END SAuiNCE C7-31-91 4,2G0.CC 701,401 40 3,831 45 694,226.44 24,454 65 103.868 40 126.461.58 431,328.53 64,077 83 102.865 00 13.890.80 26.279 53 133,526.80 17.422 54 68 .390 96 15,792.11 622,755.81 1,500.000.00 3,400,000.00 175.612.86 10.946,607.55 198,828 12 214,365.00 54,500.00 222,000.00 250,000.00 DODD FOREST HEIGHTS 245.000 00 FOREST PARK FULBRIGHT 3.725.788.63 60.500 00 10.000.00 32,089.70 QARbANO GILLUM 10.000.00 57 960 00 245,000.00 3,693,698.93 60,500.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 57,980.00 HALL 500.000.00 500,000.00 IRC JEFFERSON 2.634,568.55 838 200 00 KING 2.350.000 00 FAIR MABELVALE ELEM MABELVALE JR 50.000 00 199.279 00 950.000.00 MANN 25.000 00 MCCLELLAN 400 000 00 C 876 42 2,634,588 55 838,200.00 2.350,000 00 50,000.00 199,279.00 950,000.00 25.000 00 393,123 58EXPENDITURES MCDERMOTT MEADCV.'CLIFF OTTER CREEK PABKViEW FLiLASW HGT3 ELEM PULASKI HGT3 JR PURCH.-SING rC'W\nne : ti Y A'ATSON WILLIAMS SUBTOTAL RETENUES sale of property PROCEEDS-FIRE LOSS INTEREST SUBTOTAL TOTAL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JULY ST. 1991 BEG BALANCE 070191 65.000.00 400,000.00 CC AAA AA 24.00000 55,000.00 207 995.00 91.530.00 50.000.00 303.980.00 40.000.00 203,000 00 350,000.00 14,852.138.79 147,614.26 115.677.75 0.00 263 492.01 28.890.701.58 INCOME 1991-92 0.00 6.069.08 6 069 05 6.069 08 TRANSEERS 1391-9S 0.00 C 00 0.00 EXPENDITUReS END BALANCE 19S1-92 39.S10.61 13,745 00 13.745 00 840 415 36 0T-31~91 e5.000.C0 400,000.00 CC Ann nn 24.000.00 55,000 00 207,995.00 91,530.00 50.000.00 303.530.00 40,000.00 203.000.00 350.000.00 14.612,528.18 147.814.26 101.932.75 6.069 08 255 815.09 28.056.354 80OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING 201 EAST MARKHAM, SUITE 510 HERITAGE WEST BUILDING LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 October 28, 1991 Dr. Ruth Steele, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ruth\nAs you are aware, the District Court is obligated to monitor the use of settlement monies and does so through the Office of Desegregation Monitorin! ig- ODM must be able to provide the Court with information which (1) accurately and comprehensively accounts for the expenditure of settlement funds\n(2) demonstrates the link between the districts legal requirements and the fiscal underwriting of those requirements\n(3) describes a desegregation budgeting process that can be demonstrated, justified, and verified\nand (4) enables the district to determine what adjustments might be necessary in order to align finances with desegregation obligations. For the past several weeks, my associate. Bob Morgan, has been working closely with your Manager of Support Services, Jim Ivey, and also with our financial consultants, the Arkansas Financial Group, to develop a system for adequately and fairly monitoring desegregation finances. During the course of this process it has become apparent that the settlement monies are being spent at a rate which will exhaust them long before the plan commitments and their scheduled fulfillment have been realized. Budgeting and fiscal management to ensure fuU implementation of the desegregation plan needs to be such that the district can answer the following questions: 1. 2. 3. What are the district guidelines for identifying expenditures as desegregation costs? What process is used to project the desegregation budget? How do these costs correspond to the specific provisions of the desegregation plan, i.e., what is the correlation between the settlement monies and specific desegregation objectives?Page Two October 28, 1991 4. If a cost item is determined to be both a desegregation and nondesegregation item (staff development might be a fair example), what criteria determines the apportionment of cost to the desegregation budget (Code 13) and the \"regular\" budget? 5. Who makes the decisions about which cost items are budgeted in Code 13? 6. Who makes the decisions about which costs are actually debited to Code 13? 7. What criteria determine how budgeting and debiting decisions are made? 8. What checks are built into the accounting/bookkeeping system to prevent arbitrary debiting of cost items to one budget category or another? 9. What are the districts spending priorities and how have they been determined? 10. What is the districts plan and corresponding timeline for reaching the 90% achievement goal for black students, thereby attaining forgiveness of state loans the district otherwise must repay? 11. What steps is the district taking to prevent a funding shortfall that will inhibit carrying out the desegregation plan to its fall extent? Within the next ten days. Bob and I want to meet with you to discuss the answers to these questions. We are aware of the enormity of the ddstricfs planning, budgeting, and accounting tasks\nif we can be of any assistance as the above information is gathered, please dont hesitate to let me know. Very truly yours, V-Ann S. Brown Federal Monitor cc: Judge Susan Weber Wright 71 ^KKBB0S =*j5r Little Rock School District December 12, 1991 7' in DEC 1 5 1991 Mr. Bob Morgan Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage West Building, Suite 510 Citics ot I'ior'ng 201 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 j I J 'kjt ^5^5? J S w 5 J Dear Bob: Attached are our responses to the questions posed in Ann Brown's letter to Dr. Steele on October 28. I believe you will find them to be essentially the same as our previous verbal responses. Please call if you have questions. Sincerely, T: Tony Wood Deputy Superintendent TW/ch 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361LRSD ANSWERS TO ODM QUESTIONS (Reference 10/28/91 Ann Brown letter to Dr. Steele) Question 1. Question 2. What are the district guidelines for identifying expenditures as desegregation costs? Answer: Desegregation is one of the basic objectives of the District. Almost everything we do is directed to some degree to this goal. It is not possible therefore, and we have not attempted to identify all the cost associated with it. Our approach has been to identify personnel and materials that are required for the specific programs mandated by the Desegregation Plan, to set up budget accounts for those expenses, and charge to them as the programs are implemented. This approach may result in our charging less than possible to desegregation, but it should allow us to account for the settlement funds. It has never been the view of the LRSD that the settlement funds would cover the total cost of desegregation. Using the funds for court-mandated programs will allow us to use the money and to be able to show that it was used for proper purposes. For the purposes of showing that settlement funds are properly spent, budget/expense accounts are established for the specific programs in the Desegregation Plan. Expenses associated with those programs are charged to those accounts. What process is used to project the desegregation budget? Answer: Building principals, department directors, and others responsible for various functions in the LRSD are designated as budget managers. Each spring the budget managers submit requests for each of the budget account codes assigned to them. If an individual has responsibility for a program mandated by the Desegregation Plan, he or she will have account codes for that. These budgets are approved by the Deputy Superintendent, Associate Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents (where appropriate). Manager of Support Services, and the Controller. All of these codes will show a fund code of 13. If a Desegregation Plan program requires office supplies, for example, there will be an amount coded in the budget for expenses of that description that are related to the desegregation program.QDM Response Page 2 Question 3. How do these costs correspond to the specific provisions of the desegregation plan, i.e., what is the correlation between the settlement monies and specific desegregation objectives? Answer: The costs can be tied to programs that are specified in the Desegregation Plan. This will not be obvious from accounting reports but can be done through discussion with budget managers and the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. Question 4. If a cost item is determined to be both a desegregation and nondesegregation item (staff development might be a fair example), what criteria determines the apportionment of cost to the desegregation budget (Code 13) and the \"regular budget? Answer: If. at budget time, it is determined that an individual will divide time between Desegregation Plan mandated programs and other activities, appropriate portions of that persons cost will be budgeted to the fund source codes. That persons cost will be automatically charged as budgeted through the year. For non-personnel costs, most of the expenses that can be charged to desegregation programs are easily identified, such as PAL computers and four-year- old program equipment. We have the capability to apportion costs, if needed. Question 5. Who makes the decisions about which cost items are budgeted in Code 13? Answer: The budget managers make this decision with review by the Deputy Superintendent, Associate Superintendents, the Manager of Support Services, and the Controller.QDM Response Page 3 Question 6. Who makes the decisions about which costs are actually debited to Code 13? Answer: The budget managers either make this decision or review monthly expense listings to make sure it is properly done. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation also reviews all Fund 13 expenses monthly. Since many Desegregation Plan projects are the responsibility of the Associate Superintendent for Educational Programs, she also closely reviews these expenses on a monthly basis. Further, our computer system will not allow a budget account to be overdrawn. To transfer additional money into an account from another account requires approval of the Manager of Support Services. These processes are the same as those used to control all LRSD expenses including those that must meet certain state regulations. practices are sound. Independent audits show that LRSD accounting Question 7. What criteria determine how budgeting and debiting decisions are made? Answer: The accounts are clearly named so there is little confusion. The budget managers code the expenses. Question 8. What checks are built into the accounting/bookkeeping system to prevent arbitrary debiting of cost items to one budget category or another? Answer: The procedures described above with the monthly reviews described are intended to catch any improper coding. If an expense is improperly coded to a valid account that has sufficient funds, manual reviews like those described above are the only possible ways to detect it. As stated above, these are the same procedures used throughout our system, and independent audits have consistently found our procedures to be sound.QDM Response Page 4 Question 9. What are the districts spending priorities and how have they been determined? Answer: The district must implement the programs mandated by the Desegregation Plan, must meet state education standards, must meet debt service commitments, and must make the capital improvements committed to voters in millage elections. All salary expenses are under contracts. There is little to prioritize. As Desegregation Plan programs are implemented and their effectiveness is determined, we can petition the court and the other parties to allow us to discontinue or modify those that are not effective. Until we reach that point, we can do little to prioritize our costs. Question 10. What is the districts plan and corresponding timeline for reaching the 90% achievement goal for black students, thereby attaining forgiveness of state loans the district otherwise must repay? Answer: The LRSD will implement the plan called \"No More Excuses: A Plan to Increase Learning for All Students in the Little Rock School District.\" This plan, which was adopted by the Board of Directors on March 28, 1991, provides the framework for attaining the 90% achievement goal for black students (see attachment). Question 11. What steps is the district taking to prevent a funding shortfall that will inhibit carrying out the desegregation plan to its full extent? Answer: As stated in response #9 above, LRSD will measure effectiveness and attempt to remove ineffective programs in the plan. We will address overall funding problems through reducing programs that we can reduce, better management practices and, if necessary, a request for increased millages. F\nodminfo2.wpdNO MORE EXCUSES: A PLAN TO INCREASE LEARNING FOR ALL STUDENTS IN THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT The purpose of this report is twofold: first, to identify and discuss problems and issues which the Little Rock School District must address if we are to substantially improve the level of learning in our schools\nand second, to outline a plan to empower all our students to be successful learners. BACKGROUND impo: teic: What students are learning in our schools is the most tant issue School Board members, administrators, and ors must consider as decisions are made about education in cur ccsEiunity. The elimination of academic achievement disparities between black and white students, the enrollment in upper level courses, appropriate remediation for the students who are not learning, assignments, the use of school libraries, homework minimum grade poin requirements for graduation. number and quality of reading assignments, multi-cultural the education. \"tracking,\" higher order thinking skills, and many other issues are all related to this central question: How can we get students to learn what we think they should know and how can we be sure they are learning as much and as well as they can? Last fall the administration was asked to consider a proposal to require a 2.0 grade point average as a requirement for graduation and to subm consideration by December.\na rep The ad: to the School inistration oa: te. ,5 fcr ts its report December 3 and recommended that the 2.0 requirement be phased in starting with certain minimum requirements for the 1991-92 school year and implemented fully by 1994-95. The recommendation was presented to the Board at the December meeting and tabled for further consideration at a later meeting. o Cl Tn January, 1991, the Little Rock School District received culum Audit conducted in September 199 0 by a team of administrators and professors from the National Academy of School Executives. This audit was authorized by the Board when it adopted the budget in August 1990. The audit found that the District's curriculum is disjointed, uncoordinated, and inappropriately sequenced. It found that district-wide curriculum objectives do not exist, grading practices are o: IS ent, promotion criteria are unclear. assessment is not to the curriculum, and curriculum guides lack internal ency. In short, even though the Little Rock School ri t is performing \"reasonably well\" according to the Curriculum Audit, much work needs to be done to improve curriculum design, content, delivery, sequence, and assessment of student learning.Following the December Board meeting, three public hearings were held to give District patrons an opportunity to express their views regarding the proposed 2.0 requirement. were evident during these hearings. Two opinions The first was that people were generally in favor of the schools setting higher learning expectations for students. The second opinion was that schools are responsible for seeing to it that students receive every possible opportunity to develop their intellectual abilities to the fullest extent and that this responsibility is not being met in all cases. Concern was also expressed for the student with identified learning deficits who might not ever be able to achieve the requirement of a 2.0 g.p.a. Since the public hearings, a survey was sent to teachers and principals requesting their opinions concerning the 2.0 g.p The results showed support for the 2.0 but mos requirement. . a. thought it should be phased in. The District's Biracial Advisory Committee took the position that the effectiveness of the current remedial and compensatory programs should be assessed before the Board decides to implement the 2.0 g.p.a. requirement. PROBLEMS AND ISSUES The problem of low student achievement in the Little Rock School District is not unique in our community. In a report entitled Accelerating Academic Achievement: A Summary of Findings from 20 Years of NAEP [National Assessment of Educational Progress, September 1990] the following points are made: 1, \"Most of the data in this report show th our present education performance is low and not improving.\" 2. \"Research shows that student academic perforaance is likely to be greater when pupils work hard, when parents are actively involved in their children's education, and when teachers and school administrators incorporate research tested improvements in the classroom. Yet, this report ....shows that these things are not typically happening.\" 3 . \"Time devoted to some subject areas is limited... H 4 . Homework is often minimal or non-existent. II 25. \"Most classroom work is dominated by passive learning activities that feature teacher and textbook-presented information despite research findings indicating that these techniques are not the most effective. tt 6. II Although parents are our children's first and most effective teachers, large proportions of students are not reading outside of school, are spending excessive hours watching television, and are spending little time on homework. II 7. \"Students can read at a surface level, getting the gist of material, but they do not read analytically or perform well on challenging reading assignments. II c . It Small proportions of students write well enough to accomplish the purposes of different writing tasks\nmost do not communicate effectively.\" 9. \"Students' grasp of the four basic arithmetic operations and beginning problem solving is far from universal in elementary and junior high school... II 10. \"Only small proportions of students appear to develop specialized knowledge needed to address science-based problems and the pattern of falling behind begins in elementary school. II 11. \"Students are familiar with events that have shaped American history, but they do not appear to understand the significance and connection of these events.\" 12. \"In recent assessments, more students appear tc e gaining basic skills, yet fewer are demonstrating a erase of higher-level aoolication of these skills. II 13 . \"Despite progress in narrowing the gaps, the differences in performance between white students and their minority counterparts remain unacceptably larce.\" 14 . It Large proportions of students....are not en led in challenging mathematics and scie-ca coursework.\" 315. II Across the last 20 years, little seems to have changed in the way students are taught. Despite much research suggesting better alternatives, classrooms still appear to be dominated by textbooks, teacher lectures, and short answer activity sheets. II other findings from the NAEP report are also highly disturbing: 31 percent of the 12th graders in 1988 read five or fewer pages per day from alJ^ textbooks in both homework and school. 52 percent of the 12th graders in 1988 said they never or rarelv borrow books from the school or public library. 97 percent of the 4th graders reported that they completed workbooks or skill sheet assignments on what thev read\nonly 45 percent said they talked in pairs or groups about their reading. More than 30 percent of the eighth and twelfth graders reported never talking to someone at home about things they read. Nearly three-fourths of the eighth graders had teachers who reported spending an hour or less on writing instruction and assistance each week - o less than 15 minrtes per cav. At grade 12, half the students assessed in 1983 reported that they had written two or fewer papers as part of any school assignment in the six weeks before the assessment. Only 14 percent of the Sth graders and 9 percent of the seniors reported weekly writing assignments of three or more pages. At grade 3, 49 percent of the teachers reported spending one to two hours a week teaching science. In 1986, one q-.iarter of the c sessed were no enrclle eleventh graders in a math course and another one quarter were taking lower j.ev5 Ma t'1 mat.h courses such as General ematics, ?re-algebra, or Algebra I. 4Slightly more than half said they were not taking any type of science course. More than two-thirds of the high school seniors typically do an hour or less of homework each day. Only 29 percent had two or more hours of homework each day. These findings are by no means all that the NAEP Report presented. Many others are equally distressing. The inescapable conclusion is that students, for the most part, do not learn nearly what they are able to learn. for several reasons: This appears to be the case (1) they are taught in ways that have been proven ineffective over and over by well-documented research\n(2) the curriculum is content-deficient, and (3) expectations from both parents and educators are set at an unacceptably low level. While these findings are based on nationwide research, they are typical of what we find locally and should give us cause for e concern. In fact, the grade distribution, test scores. level of expectations, a large amount of \"seatwork\" in our classrooms, and the limited use of libraries are among the indicators in our own District that support these findings. As we examine our schools in relation to the NAEP report and decide whether to impose a minimum requirement for graduation, we must reflect upon events that have greatly affected our ability to deliver quality education to our students. 1983, we have been in court almost continuously. Since January, During that period, no less than four desegregation plans have been written. Weeks were spent in 1938 and 1989 negotiating a settlement with the State to bring an end to the desegregation litigation. District has experienced significant changes in its geographi The boundaries. Board governance. and administration. As wa ed out in the Curriculum Audit, the District has had five different superintendents since 1982. The issues we have dealt with and the rapidity of the changes which have occurred in the District have contributed in varying degrees to weakening many of our internal processes and organizational procedures. We have seen job roles become less clearly defined, lines of authority eroded, and employees not held accountable for their work. The result  as was vividly and painfully described in the Curriculum Audit  is a district in which \"Learning is not likely to get any better, and it could continue to get worse unless administrative direction, expertise. provided in the educational programs of the L. and intervention are ict. It (p.l4) e Rock School In fulfill opinion, two hings are necessary before we can he responsibilities we have as a school district toward 5our patrons and students. reviewed. First, Board policies must be revised, and in some cases improved. Coherent, consistent regulations, directives, and procedures must be developed where needed to support the enactment of these policies. Then all employees must be held accountable for carrying out Board policies and adhering to regulations, directives, and procedures developed to support them. Second, as the Audit pointed out, the curriculum must be reviewed, revised as necessary, developed in an appropriate scope and sequence, and capable of supporting carefully written educational objectives. In my opinion, we cannot afford to take three to five years to complete this redesign of our curriculum. It must be started now. Core areas of the curriculum (reading. language arts, math, science, social studies and fine arts) be appropriately scoped and sequenced in time for use during the 1992-93 school year. This will require enormous work by a cadre of teachers and administrators, and it may very well require the expertise of curriculum designers who can work with our staff in putting our entire curriculum together in the proper scope. sequence, and format, K-\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":"aarl_andrewyoung-oh_aarl-young-1069","title":"Footage of Andrew J. Young at Party for the Mayor's Fellowship of the Arts, 1989","collection_id":"aarl_andrewyoung-oh","collection_title":"Andrew J. Young Oral Histories","dcterms_contributor":["Young, Andrew, 1932-"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":["Atlanta (Ga.). Mayor's Office"],"dc_date":["1989"],"dcterms_description":["Former Mayor Andrew J. Young graced the celebration of the Mayor's Fellowship of the Arts, joining in to honor the program's esteemed fellows. The event was a festive gathering designed to recognize the accomplishments and contributions of these talented individuals within the program."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Andrew J. Young papers"],"dcterms_subject":["United States. Congress. House","Legislators--United States","Atlanta (Ga.)","African American civil rights workers","Civil rights","African American politicians","House Democratic Caucus (U.S.)","Social sciences and history","African American history","Art","Art history"],"dcterms_title":["Footage of Andrew J. Young at Party for the Mayor's Fellowship of the Arts, 1989"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Auburn Avenue Research Library on African-American Culture and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://youtu.be/elXfIaqix74"],"edm_is_shown_at":["https://dlg.usg.edu/record/aarl_andrewyoung-oh_aarl-young-1069"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["video recordings (physical artifacts)"],"dcterms_extent":["20 min, 36 sec."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Young, Andrew, 1932-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_48840","title":"\"Gesundheit!\" [graphic] : 22nd Boise peace quilt, July, 1989.","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Idaho, Ada County, 43.45112, -116.24109","United States, Idaho, Boise, 43.61656, -116.200835"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1989"],"dcterms_description":["Title from item.","Copyright, Boise Peace Quilt Project.","On notecard verso: Bepple Kewpie Cards B2200125.","On verso: Awarded to Patch Adams, M.D., a man living his exuberant dream of building a healing community where modern medicine is humanized and affordable; where joyful good humor meets good health. Join us in people-to-people peacemaking."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":null,"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Quilts"],"dcterms_title":["\"Gesundheit!\" [graphic] : 22nd Boise peace quilt, July, 1989."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.48840"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact holding institution for information regarding use and copyright status."],"dcterms_medium":["photomechanical printscolor1980-1990.gmgpc","cardscolor1980-1990.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_448","title":"Gifted and Talented program","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":["1989/2000"],"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","Educational planning","Gifted persons","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Gifted and Talented program"],"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/448"],"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\n4?.-1 Little Rock Central High School Enrollment Data Advanced Placement/Gifted and Talented Classes End of School Year 1996-97 Course Black Other Total % Black Am. Hist. 18 108 126 14 Euro Hist 44 50 12 French IV 32 37 14 French V\u0026amp;VT 35 36 German 22 22 Latin 14 16 13 Spanish 19 94 113 17 English IV 15 97 112 13 Biology 12 37 49 24 Chemistry 22 26 Physics 13 13 Calculus AB 41 49 16 Calculus BC 16 16 Statistics 57 62 6 5 1 0 2 4 0 8 0 5 3 0 4 0 0 8 All Advanced Placement classes at Central are open to identified gifted and talented students without regards to their intent to take the Advanced Placement test at the completion of the course. Their records do not indicate whether they entered the class as GT students or as Advanced Placement students\nconsequently, the numbers above contain both categories of students.Dear Dr. Williams, My name is Sarah Holt. Five years ago I was in Hall High School for kindergarten. It was different than other schools in good ways. One way was how the teenagers came in and helped us. One of those teenagers ended up being a great role model for me at that time. I really looked up to everyone who came in to help us. Since Mrs. Wright had so much help from the high school students, she could plan activities that were very Involved. We couldn't have done those activities In larger groups. Mrs. Wright was an exceptionally good teacher. She always had fun activities planned and gave me a great beginning in my education.! know if I feel this way the high school kids do too. It would be awful if you shut it down because then other kids would miss out on the fun. Sincerely, Sarah K. HoltibUe ' ') ' DKS9 I / Administrative Vacancy 3.2 an -----, 3 I (Position now open ' GIFTED PROGRAM SPECIALIST (COORDINATOR) t I I Little Rock School District J Septepiber 7, 1989 QUALIFICATIONS\n1. A Master's Degree (rninimutn) in Elementary or Secondary Education. 2. Must meet Arkansas certification requirements for Gifted and Talented. 3. Must have at least three (3) years of successful teaching experience of which one (1) year must be in a Gifted and Talented environment. 4, 5. 6. NOTE: Demonstrates strong human relations/interpersonal skills. Evidence of a strong conmitment to gifted education. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality integrated education. APPLICANTS SHOULD BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INlflAL SEEING 1NTRVIW\n-----------------------------------------------------------A r REPORTS TO\nSupervisor - Gifted and Talented Jr JOB GOAL: To assist the Supervisor - Gifted and Talented in the tasks of implementing K-K\u0026gt; gifted programming and other aspects of the Gifted Education Department. ' / BASIC PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES: 1 rS?^. .Li [' 1. 4. 3\\ '-5, 6. Assists in conducting program monitoring tasks. Observes and advises gifted education personnel. Provides consultation to principals. Identifies, investigates, assesses and provides solutions to concerns related to all components of the program. Assists in administrative tasks inherent in the program. Other dtities assigned by the Supervisor. A r  es 3iVd 9. ,K:SI S66IZe2/S0 ' '(3 ':3 ,'T i Ia- B.j'cvAi,  )! '/ a\" Page Two (2) Gifted Program Specialist salary'AND TERMS\n$25,306 - $38,877 -- An Eleven (11) Month Contract plus Educational Stipend, Car Allowance, and Benefits Package. EVALUATION\nPerformance of this job will be evaluated in accordance with provisions of the Boards policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. DEADLINE FOR RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS\nSeptember 15, 198S SEND WRITTEN LETTERS OF INQUIRY TO\nEstelle Matthis Associate Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 NOTE\nF0 3\u0026amp;yd I-A, INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER V   7 a'7 V. 'I Aq.\nl'V\\ J 1' I aRBaiitaji ( 9 cJ i- 7.1 I -V-'H\" 'Jii A, SS:ST S66T/2/S0 i4bi ) Hl I ^3 S0 SCHOOL Cloverdale Jr. Hign LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SECONDARY FACILITATORS 1994-95 PHONE NUMBER 570-4085 FACILITATOR Tamara Gullett Dunbar Magnet______ Forest Heights Jr. High Henderson Magnet Jr. High Madelvaie Jr. Hign Mann Magnet Pulaski Heights Jr. southwest Jr. central High J.A. Fair Hall McClellan Parkview Magnet 324-2440 671-6390 228-3050 455-7400 324-2450 671-6250 570-4070 324-2300 228-3100 671-6200 570-4100 228-3000 Joyce underwood Marian Thomason JOy Williams snarron Cannon Bonnie Bumpers Marsha Bibb Jackie Falls Lois Thompson Ruthie Hiett Joan Cage Jan Conine Linda Kamara 3 S661/E2/S0 \"I. f' 'SO 3Sd g ss:si S66TZeS/S0 i Etease Post Administrative Vacancy 3.2 an Position now open GIFTED PROGRAM SPECIALIST (COORDINATOR) Little Rock Schooi District September 7, 1989 QUALIFICATIONS: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. NOTE: . A Master's Degree (minimum) in Elementary or Secondary Education. . Must meet Arkansas certification requirements for Gifted and Talented. Must have at least three (3) years of successful teaching experience of which one (1) year must be in a Gifted and Talented environment. . Demonstrates strong human relations/interpersonal skills. Evidence of a strong commitment to gifted education. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality integrated education. APPLICANTS SHOULD BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE Initial screening interview. \" -------------------------------------------- REPORTS TO: Supervisor - Gifted and Talented JOB GOAL: To assist the Supervisor - Gifted and Talented in the tasks of implementing K-12 gifted programming and other aspects of the Gifted Education Department. BASIC PERFORMANCE RESPONSIBILITIES: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Assists in conducting program monitoring tasks. Observes and advises gifted education personnel. Provides consultation to principals. Identifies, investigates, assesses and provides solutions to concerns related to all components of the program. Assists in administrative tasks inherent in the program. Other duties assigned by the Supervisor,4. page Two (2) Gifted Program Specialist SALARY AND TERMS: S'.??  *\" plus Educatl Car Allowance, and Benefits Package. onal Stipend, EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated i RnarH'e p evaluated in accordance with provisions of thp Board s policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. Provisions ot the DEADLINE FOR RECEIPT OF APPLICATIONS: September 15, 1989 SEND WRITTEN LETTERS OF INQUIRY TO: Estelle Matthis Associate Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. 7:\n,-,\n, A POSITION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN -------- must COMPLETE A VERY S^CAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR 'I .\":i INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER(?c: in -s. pa,-OTr'\",7 -O OCT 1 1994 Office of Desegregaiicn l-Zcnitvvng October 11, 1994 Elizabeth Shy Dowell 68 Cardinal Valley Drive North Little Rock, AR 72120 Dr. Henry P. Williaims, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Williams\nAttached is a copy of the position paper as adopted by the Dunbar Arkansans for Gifted And Talented Education (A.G.A.T.E.) membership at the September 28, 1994, meeting which you were unable to attend. A.G.A.T.E. wants the district and school board members to understand this adoption was chosen for what they believe is best for the entire school population. If based solely on the needs of their individual Gifted and Talented identified children at Dunbar, the parents decision would have been far different. Beginning last spring, as the district began addressing the budget constraints, parents were systematically excluded from the decision making process. The program, as implemented for the cunent school year, is not what was told to parents and students during recruiting. Again this fall, before any opportunity for real dialogue between the district administration and parents, a decision was reached, based on limited parental input, to re-instate the program as it had been for the previous school year. My personal experience with parents has taught me there is a very real distrust of the district on the part of its patrons. I believe it is this type of unilateral decision-making which promotes these feelings. As the logistics became known, such as the master schedule having to be reworked for the entire school population, a lack of parental concensus became obvious. A.G.A.T.E. feared a situation was developing that would pit parent against parent in trying to implement the fall mandate. We, therefore, elected to support maintaining the program as is for the current school year only. The Gifted and Talented program at Dunbar is a bare minimum program. An enhanced program is probably a more accurate title. It is suggested that all members of the Board tour Fuller Junior High School, in the Pulaski County Special School District, and make a comparison between the two G and T programs. I believe that LRSD will find it more difficult in the near future to recruit white students from the other districts as the success and quality of Fuller Junior High's program becomes more widely known throughout the county. Whether as individuals we support Gifted and Talented programs or not, in terms of desegregating Dunbar, it is the Gifted and Talented program which draws white students. If the quality and integrity of the program cannot grow, the district will find it harder to recruit and parental support for the district will diminish. Sincerely Yours in Support of Public Schools, Elizabeth Shy Dowell President, Dunbar A.G.A.T.E. ESD/esd C: Ms. Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitor Little Rock School District School Board Members: Ms. Patricia Gee Ms. Oma Jacovelli Dr. Katherine Mitchell Ms. Judy Magness Mr. T. Kevin O'Malley Ms. Linda Pondexter Mr. John A. Riggs, IV Ms. Nancy Acre, Dunbar PrincipalArkansans for Gifted And Talented Education DUNBAR JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL A.G.A.T.E. AFFILIATE POSITION PAPER MAGNET PROGRAMS AS ADMINISTERED AT DUNBAR JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL The membership of Dunbar Junior High School A.G.A.T.E. voted at its September 28, 1994, meeting to adopt a position regarding the administration of the Gifted and Talented and International Studies programs at DJHS, as follows: 1. 2. 3. Beginning with the 1995-96 school year, the Gifted and Talented and International Studies programs at Dunbar shall return to their original 1990-91 formats, as established and implemented by the Little Rock School District Dunbar Committee\nmore specifically. a. b. c. d. letters will be sent by the Student Assignment Office to all attendance zone students informing them they must participate in the magnet programs and enroll in a foreign language class\nstudents electing not to participate in the magnet programs will be allowed by the Little Rock School District to opt to attend another junior high\nstudents shall be required to return a letter of intent, the LRSD will reinstate the ratio cap among attendance zone black students, thereby encouraging the recruitment of identified gifted black students outside the attendance zone to enroll in Dunbar\nthe LRSD Dunbar Committee shall be reconstituted as per the April 29, 1992, LRSD Desegregation Plan, page 143\ncommittee make-up should be by position, not specific individuals, i.e. LRSD Gifted Supervisor, Dunbar Principal, Dunbar International Studies and Gifted and Talented specialists, one black parent, one white parent and others as needed\nidentified Gifted and Talented students and designated Enriched students will not be grouped together in the four core subjects\nteachers of Gifted and Talented classes will be certified as Gifted and Talented teachers. To strengthen the program, Gifted and Talented classroom size shall not exceed 22 students. For the remainder of the 1994-95 school year ONLY, the identified Gifted and Talented students and the designated Enriched students at Dunbar may be assigned to combined classes in the four core subjects.4. The Little Rock School District will provide a minimum of two additional Gifted and Talented specialists at Dunbar for the remainder of the 1994-95 school year for the purpose of facilitating the Gifted and Talented teachers by providing instructional time with small groups and individuals as needed. The Dunbar A.G.A.T.E. group believes these criteria for administering the magnet programs at Dunbar are the bare minimums for maintaining the quality and integrity of these programs and for recruiting future students in compliance with orders of the Federal District Court. FOR MORE INFORMATION OR QUESTIONS PLEASE CONTACT: ELIZABETH SHY DOWELL President, DJHS A G A T E. 68 Cardinal Valley Drive North Little Rock, AR 72120 (501)834-3720Arkansans for Gifted And Talented Education DUNBAR JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL A.G.A.T.E. AFFILIATE 1100 Wright Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Elizabeth Shy Dowell, President January 26, 1995 Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RECEIV' JAN 3 11995 Dear Dr. Williams\nOffice of Desegregation Monitoring In follow-up to the Dunbar A.G.A.T.E. Position Paper of last fall, we reiterate our concerns for the International Studies and Gifted and Talented magnet programs as outlined. While all four points remain very high priorities, at this time we want to recapitulate item 1 .b. of the position paper,(see attached.) Specifically, the ratio cap among attendance zone black students and the recruitment of identified gifted and talented black students from outside the Dunbar attendance zone. When Dunbar Junior High School opened as a magnet programs school, to meet court ordered desegregation guidelines, a 60% ratio cap for black students from the attendance zone was established. The Student Assignment OflBce initially required a student, who elected not to participate in either program, to return a form to the SAO. At that point, the student would be assigned to another school in the district. If the number of black attendance zone students electing to opt out of Dunbar dropped the ratio below 60%, the school could then recruit G \u0026amp; T identified black students from other attendance zones. Three years ago, without informing either the school administration or the parents of participants, the Student Assignment OflBce stopped sending out the above mentioned forms. This left prospective students and their parents with the impression they could come to Dunbar and not participate in the either of the magnet programs. As this information circulated and SAO never said anything to the contrary, students who in the past had opted out, returned to Dunbar. Not only did this unpublished SAO policy have a devastating effect on our programs, i.e. the elimination of some courses and the number of sections available in others, but each year we fall further behind in meeting the court ordered desegregation guidelines. Our numbers are approximately 69% black, 31% non-black for the current school year. We believe it is imperative, for the viability of the programs and for student recruitment, the Student Assignment Office for the 1995-96 school year should: A. in order to be in compliance with the courts, reinstate the ratio cap\nB. require students to return a form committing themselves to the Dunbar program(s) or be allowed to opt out of Dunbar.As cautioned in my cover letter of October 11,1994, regarding what might happen when the quality of Fuller Junior High School's G \u0026amp; T program became known, we have lost two Pulaski County Special School District white students to Fuller and a third is actively looking into making the switch. Lest this leave the impression that Gifted and Talented programs are of most import to white parents, I pass along the concerns some black parents have brought to me. More pointedly, the small number of black students in the G \u0026amp; T program at Dunbar. One parent told of how her son felt uncomfortable with so few black males in his G \u0026amp; T classes and the pressure put on him by peers to not participate. Of those who came to me, all said virtually the same thing, their children need others like themselves to withstand the peer pressure. We can only accomplish this through the proper use of the ratio cap. While we understand and sympathize with your daily pressures, we implore that these matters be given an immediate and high priority by you and your staff. Sincerely, Elizabeth Shy Dowell President, Dunbar A.G.A.T.E. Enclosure: 1 cc\nMs. Ann Brown, Desegregation Monitor Dr. C. Russell Mayo, LRSD Student Assignment Office LRSD School Board Members: Ms. Patricia Gee Ms. Oma Jacovelli Ms. Judy Magness Dr. Katherine Mitchell Mr. Kevin O'Malley Ms. Linda Pondexter Mr. John A Riggs, IV Ms. Nancy Acre, Dunbar Principal ESD/esd Arkansans for Gifted And Talented Education DUNBAR JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL A.G.A.T.E. AFFILIATE POSITION PAPER MAGNET PROGRAMS AS ADMINISTERED AT DUNBAR JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL The membership of Dunbar Junior High School A.G.A.T.E. voted at its September 28,1994, meeting to adopt a position regarding the administration of the Gifted and Talented and International Studies programs at DJHS, as follows: 1. 2, 3. Beginning with the 1995-96 school year, the Gifted and Talented and International Studies programs at Dunbar shall return to their original 1990-91 formats, as established and implemented by the Little Rock School District Dunbar Committee\nmore specifically: a. b. c. d. letters will be sent by the Student .Assignment Office to all attendance zone students informing them they must participate in the magnet programs and enroll in a foreign language class\nstudents electing not to participate in the magnet programs will be allow^ed by the Little Rock School District to opt to attend another junior high\nstudents should be required to return a letter of intent\nthe LRSD will reinstate the r atio cap among attendance zone black students, thereby encouraging the reciuitnient of identified gifted black students outside the attendance zone to enroll in Dunbar\nthe LRSD Dunbar Committee shall be reconstituted as per the April 29, 1992, LRSD Desegregation Plan, page 143\ncommittee make-up should be by position, not specific individuals, i.e. LRSD Gifted Supervisor, Dunbar principal, Dunbar's International Studies and Gifted and Talented specialists, one black parent, one white parent and others as needed\nidentified Gifted and Talented students and designated Enriched students will not be grouped to gether in the four core subjects\nteachers of Gifted and Talented classes will be certified tis Gifted and Talented teachers. To strengthen the program, classroom sij'.e shall not exceed 22 students. For the remainder of the 1994-95 school yearONLY, the identified Gifted and Talented students and the designated Enriched studea's at Dunbar may be assigned to combined classes in the four core subjects.4. The Little Rock School District will provide a minimum of two additional Gifted and Talented specialists at Dunbar for the remainder of the 1994-95 school year for the purpose of facilitating the Gifted and Talented teachers by providing instructional time with small groups and individuals as needed. I The Dunbar A.G.A.T.E. group believes these criteria for administering the magnet programs at Dunbar are the bare minimums for maintaining the quality of these programs and for recruiting future students in compliance with orders of the Federal District Court. FOR MORE INFORMATION OR QUESTIONS PLEASE CONTACT: ELIZABETH SHY DOWELL President, DJHS A.G.A.T.E. 68 Cardinal Valley Drive North Little Rock, AR 72120 (501) 834-3720 Icc.- Tnczi 0=* . -MAY-16-95 TUE 14:49 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 RECEfoB-n May 2, 1995 MAY 1 6 1995 Dear Parents of Children in Gifted and Talented Programs, Office of Desegregation Montoring The Little Rock School District Board of Directors voted April 27, 1995,\" to eliminate the District's administrative position of Gifted and Talented Coordinator. There will be only one district position (District G \u0026amp; T Supervisor) remaining to serve the G\u0026amp;T programs in our forty-nine (49) schools. The Supervisor will be responsible for all administrative duties, thereby, severely restricting the amount of time that can be given to direct services and support to the G.T. Specialists. It is urgent you be informed about how this budget cut will directly effect your child. We also need your help to reverse this sudden, unexpected action by the LRSD Board of Directors and district administration. The Gifted and Talented Coordinator works in direct support of our G \u0026amp; T Specialists by providing continuity of the G.T. curriculum throughout the district, thereby insuring strong programs in each school. This position is responsible for monitoring programs and records, finalizing the G.T. identification process for each child, conducting in-service training for school staffs, PTA groups, and A.G.A.T.E. (Arkansans for Gifted and Talented Education) meetings, and developing educational plans for students with special needs. Furthermore, this position is responsible for organizing Odyssey of the Mind, Quiz Bowl, and Sixth Grade Challenge competitions. These special events are open to ALL students. However, these will no longer be available to students if the elimination of this position stands. All students ultimately benefit from the Gifted and Talented program, because the G.T. Specialists share curriculum, strategies, and learning tools with the classroom teachers to provide enrichment opportunities for all children. In order to save this position, please help by doing one or all of the following\n1. Contact your LRSD Board Representative and let them know you want this position maintained, see attached\n2. Write or call the LRSD Administration, 324-2000\n3. Attend the Special Session of the LRSD Board of Directors meeting concerning this issue, date to be announced\n4, Contact the Office of the Desegregation Monitoring, Ann Brown or Margie Powell 376-6200. 5. It is very important that parents write to the Honorable Susan Webber Wright, District Judge, 600 W. Capitol, Little Rock, AR 72201. Children in the Gifted and Talented Programs deserve to have challenging programs to aid them in fulfilling their highest potential. When the school district attempts to dismantle or severely compromise successful programs, then we, immediate action. as parents, are obligated to take For further information regarding this issue please contact either Barbara Mills, 664-5681 or Elizabeth Dowell, 834-3720. Barbara Mills Elementary A.G.A.T.E. Parent Elizabeth Dowell Secondary A.G.A.T.E. Parent May 2, 1995 Dear Parents of Children in Gifted and Talented Programs, The Little Rock School District Board of Directors voted April 27, 1995, to eliminate the District's administrative position of Gifted and Talented Coordinator. There will be only one district position (District G \u0026amp; T Supervisor) remaining to serve the G\u0026amp;T programs in our forty-nine (49) schools. The Supervisor will be responsible for all administrative duties, thereby, severely restricting the amount of time that can be given to direct services and support to the G.T. Specialists. It is urgent you be informed about how this budget cut will directly effect your child. We also need your help to reverse this sudden, unexpected action by the LRSD Board of Directors and district administration. The Gifted and Talented Coordinator works in direct support of our G \u0026amp; T Specialists by providing continuity of the G.T. curriculum throughout the district, thereby insuring strong programs in each school. This position is responsible for monitoring programs and records, finalizing the G.T. identification process for each child, conducting in-service training for school staffs, PTA groups, and A.G.A.T.E. (Arkansans for Gifted and Talented Education) meetings, and developing educational plans for students with special needs. Furthermore, this position is responsible for organizing Odyssey of the Mind, Quiz Bowl, and Sixth Grade Challenge competitions. These special events are open to ALL students. However, these will no longer be available to students if the elimination of this position stands. All students ultimately benefit from the Gifted and Talented program, because the G.T. Specialists share curriculum, strategies, and learning tools with the classroom teachers to provide enrichment opportunities for ail children. In order to save this position, please help by doing one or all of the following: 1. Contact your LRSD Board Representative and let them know you want this position maintained, see attached\n2. Write or call the LRSD Administration, 324-2000\n3. Attend the Special Session of the LRSD Board of Directors meeting concerning this issue, date to be announced\n4. Contact the Office of the Desegregation Monitoring, Ann Brown or Margie Powell 376-6200. 5. It is very important that parents write to the Honorable Susan Webber Wright, District Judge, 600 W. Capitol, Little Rock, AR 72201. Children in the Gifted and Talented Programs deserve to have challenging programs to aid them in fulfilling their highest potential. When the school district attempts to dismantle or severely compromise successful programs, then we, as parents, are obligated to take immediate action. For further information regarding this issue please contact either Barbara Mills, 664-5681 or Elizabeth Dowell, 834-3720. Barbara Mills Elementary A.G.A.T.E. Parent Elizabi Dowell Secondary A.G.A.T.E. Parent May 4. 1 995 may I 1 1995 Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Office of Desegregation Mu. Dear Or. Williams: It is quite disturbing to find that, once again, the Little Rock School District is attempting to eliminate the high school kindergarten programs. My child participated in the program during the 1989-1990 school year and still fondly recalls the wonderful experiences the program provided her. I was extremely involved in the program myself, serving as Mrs. Wrights room mother. I spent countless hours directly involved in the classroom assisting with activities. I feel most qualified to defend the good qualities this program has. I am an elementary teacher myself who has spent eight years teaching in the classroom and another two years substitute teaching. These ten years experience have been in Georgia. Louisiana. Arkansas, and now Michigan. The system my children are now in is in a suburb of Detroit, Novi, and is most impressive. However, I have yet to find any kindergarten program that comes anywhere near the quality of your high school kindergarten programs. First and foremost is the benefit the program offers to the young children. This is such a sensible way to \"wean\" children from their mother's one-on-one care. They are in smaller groups, enabling them to see that others around them also have needs, but not yet overwhelming them with high pupil-teacher ratios. The high school students can help nurture their needs and guide their activities. With the additional help of the high school kids, the teacher can plan activities that are impossible in the traditional kindergarten setting. The high school itself provides countless opportunities for the children through their art. drama, music, foreign language, and physical education departments. It is lagniappe that this program benefits the high school students also. Many teenagers today see pregnancy and children as a \"way out* of their existing circumstances or simply as the 'cool' thing to do. This program shows them how very patient and well prepared you must be to be a parent. It also shows them how rewarding it can be to work with children. The affection shown to the high school students is so beneficial to their positive self-esteem ! The memory is still vivid in my mind of a six-foot young man saying good-bye* to his *students* on his last day of high school with tears rolling down his cheeks. Another asset of the program is that, hopefully, many young people would find teaching to be the profession of their choice. In conclusion, I feel it sad that every five year-old in the country cant have the opportunity to be involved in such a rewarding program. Please strongly consider leaving this program in place. Let it be a shining star in the Little Rock School District\nsomething unique that other systems throughout the state or the country do not offer. Dont allow this program to fall victim to the mediocrity we see in so many public school systems. Sincerely, Patricia B. Holt 45409 Addington Lane Novi, Michigan 48374 cc: E. Wright S. Wright A. Brown R. Mayo K. Mitchell K. O'Malley J. Magness J. Riggs L. Poindexter P. Gee S. JohnsonMAY- 9-95 TUE 15:30 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 08 A -R I 'S B U R G CROWLEYS RIDGE EDUCATION SERVICE COOPERATIVE P.O. Box 377 Harrisburg Arkansas 72432 (501) 578-5426 Serving Public Schools in: Craighead County Bay-Brown Brookland Buffalo-Island Jonesboro Nettleton Riverside Valley View Westside Crittenden County Crawfordsvitle Earle Marion Turell Cross County Cross County Parkin Wynne Jackson County Newport Mississippi County Armorel Blytheville Gosnell Manila Osceola So, Miss. County Poinsett County East PoinsHtl County Harrisburg Marked Tree Trumann Weiner May 4, 1995 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright OfBce of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright, I am an associate and colleague of Diane Rynders, who is currently one of the two Gifted and Talented Coordinators for the Little Rock School District. The position held by Diane was cut in the latest round of cuts for the Little Rock School District, It seems to me that as soon as something positive gets a start in Little Rock School District, here comes something to tear it apart. Even if Diane wasnt doing a wonderful job in the position it would still need to be there. The size of Little Rock School District warrants at least two people to monitor programs and provide services. The fact that Diane does a fantastic job makes it more crucial that the position remain. She is the organizing force behind many provisions enjoyed by Little Rock students. Some of the parts of her job, besides premonitoring, staff development and dissemination of information are: Odyssey of the Mind, Quiz Bowl and Sixth Grade Challenge. I think many of the opportunities provided by the Gifted and Talented Program would fell by the wayside with the elimination of the position. This whole thing spills over into the desegregation issue, because all students will he affected within the elementary gifted program. I know you are thinking about this issue. Please know that the Little Rock School District needs its elementary gifted and talented position and it needs Diane Rynders. RSCE5VSD CHA-MSERS OF SUSAN WRIOiT MAY 0 9 1395 Sincerely, Kay Kyle Luter, Supervisor Gifted and Talented Education U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE MAY- 9-95 TUE 15:27 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P, 03 May 4,1995 The Honorable Susan Weber Wriglit Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 E. Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright, I am writing to urge you to disallow the termination of the position of Gifted and Talented Education Coordinator for the Little Rock School District which is currently filled by Diane Rynders. I have a daughter at Gibbs International Studies Magnet School who has been in the gifted program there for the past three years.' I believe that the elimination of Ms. Rynders' position will have a detrimental effect on the quality of services provided by the district in this area. My daughter has also participated in the Odyssey of the Mind program, of which Ms. Rynders is Stale Director, and I know that tire termination of her position will also affect the involvement of the district in this program as well as in olher programs Ms. Rynders coordinates. Unfortunately, these programs are some of the extra-curricular benefits of a G/T Program that is designed to impact positively on students who are not identified for the program. Through programs like Odyssey of the Mind and Quiz Bowl, Future Problem-Solving and others, many nonidentified students gel to participate as well. I have first-hand experience in Odyssey of the Mind, as I was a coach for my daughter's team the past two years at Gibbs. Besides the student programs she coordinates, Ms. Rynders also monitors .school programs and provides staff development for teachers throughout the district. I have been in education for the past 21 years and have served as Supervisor for Gifted Education at the Arkansas River Education Service Cooperative for the past 11 years. Prior to the hiring of Ms. Mable Donaldson and Ms. Rynders, the Little Rock School Dislricfs Gifted Program was almost non-existent. They are a strong team and there is no way the program can continue to develop and improve if Ms. Rynders' position is eUminaled. My appeal to you is two-fold\nboth as a parent of a student in the Little Rock School District and as an educator who knows how important key people are to programs and their growth and development. Diane Rynders is an asset to the Little Rodk School District in her role as Coordinator of Gifted Programs. It is not an expendable position if we hope to continue to have programs that not only provide opportunities for our precocious learners, but also impact positively on the education of all of our students. I urge you to overrule a short-sighted and poorly researched decision and secure the position of G/T Coordinator and Diane Rynders in it. Sincerely, CHAMBERS OF Davis Hendricks 1016 East H Avenue North Lillie Rock, AR 72116 SUSAN '//RJGHT MAY 0 9 1995 U. S, DISTRICT JUDGEMAY- 9-95 TUE 15:27 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 02 1 R, D, SAUNDERS DIRECTOR 1 i DAWSON EDUCATION CO-OP ft 711 CLINTON, SUITE 201 ARKADELPHIA, AR 71923 501 / 246-3077 May 5, 1995 Honorable Susan Webber Wright Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 E. Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Wright: I am concerned about the Little Rock School District cutting the position of Gifted and TaJented Coordinator. I feel that this program would suffer without the services that Ms. Diane Ryndera provides. She is involved with differentiated curricuhun development for gifted students, monitoring the programs in the elementary schools for the district to Insure compliance, and the identification of gifted students in the district She has L\u0026gt;ecii instrumental in giving disadvantaged and minority students an equal opportunity in the screening and identification processes provided by the mandate set forth by the state. For many years, Ms. Rynders has been involved as a state leader in the Odyssey of the Ntind comiietition. She held the position of State Director for a great number of those years. Under her guidance and leadersiiip, Aikausas has been well represented at the annual OM World Pinals. Without her expertise, I feel this program will sufier- ajid iiliimateiy the studenis of liic Littie Ruck Seiioul Disiiict wiit nut iiuve the opp^inunsiies afforded to them through her knowledge of the competition rules and regulations. Please consider the reinstatement of this position for the students of the Little Rock School District They deserve the very best we can give them, and I think Ms. Ryaders skills are an asset for the district. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, I 7' Judy Lively [udy Super-isnr of Gifted Educatiaii May 0 9  OP \" 'VSf/GHT J995 ''/ S. ^'^^TRlcr -JiJDGE: s^Ewing i^e. e^cAooZ1 eSsWin^ tAi C^ifdiEHI I I MAY- 9-95 TUE 15:28 is c 1 I* V JAIIPI) MlIXLRY. Dirfctftr Baxter Mountain home Norfork FULTON Mammoth Spring SALEM Viola INDEPENDKNCK Batesville Cord-Charlotte CUSll.MAN Midland Newark Southside SULPHUR ROCK IZARO Calico rock Izard county Consolidated Melbourne Mt. pleasant SHARP EVENING SHAPE Highland STONE MOUNTAIN VIEW Rural Special TIMBO SUSAN W WRIGHT NAESC Telephone May 5, 1995 FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 04 Northcentral Arkansas Education Service Center P. 0. Dox 739  Melbourne, Arkansns 725.56 Honorable Susan Webber Wright Office of Desegregation \u0026amp; Monitoring 201 E. Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Honorable Susan Webber Wright\nV/RIGKt 0 9 1395 U. S. DISTRICT judge I am writing you in response to a news report that the Little Rock School District is proposing to eliminate the position of Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Coordinator. While I can understand the need for the District to make budget reductions, I am truly surprised that this position would be one targeted for elimination. As a State G/T Supervisor, I work with twenty schools with varying numbers of students, I know the plight of the G/T coordinators in these schools and not one of them has anywhere near the size of program that Mrs. Rynders has with which to work. With a program the size of Little Rock School District's, approximately 4,000 students, confidently say that their G/T program is already understaffed.^ A curricular program designed to enhance the learning of high ability learners, regardless of race, creed, or color, should be the last program one would choose to negatively effect by reducing staff. I can sex, Iirs. Rynders has done an excellent job of designing student identification procedures that eliminate biases and allow gifted minority students to be considered equally for the G/T program. Without proper administrative oveirview, shortcuts will be taken, procedures will be dropped, and many gifted students will never be found. I want to emphasize that the administrative overview, in order to be effective, must come from someone with the training and knowledge concerning testing and identification procedures of all G/T students. overview I must admit that I can't comprehend why why, at a time when Little Rock is spending millions of dollars to encourage An Etiual Opportunity EmployerKATHRYN C. FITZHUGH 4715 Darragh Drive Little Rock, AR 72204 501-565-1994 Home 501-324-9444 Office *10 ,595 00^3 Q May 6, 1995 Dr. Henry P. Williams Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Gifted and Talented Coordinator, Little Rock Public Schools Dear Sir: I write as parent of Erica J. Fitzhugh, a child in the Little Rock Public School System. I write also as an interested friend of many Little Rock school children and young adults whom I see and talk to every week. I am a member of the Carver Magnet Elementary PTA, a VIPS volunteer, an Andersons Taekwondo parent volunteer and a member of Arkansans for Gifted and Talented Education. I am a Girl Scout volunteer and a former girl scout leader. I am concerned about the April 27, 1995, vote to eliminate the Little Rock School Districts Gifted and Talent Coordinators position. I understand that there is to be one similar position remaining, the District Gift and Talented Supervisors position. My concern is that activities such as Odyssey of the Mind, Quizbowl, and Sixth Grade Challenge competitions will be eliminated along with the elimination of the Gifted and Talented Coordinators position. In addition, I am concerned that the other duties of this position such as monitoring programs and conducting training for school staffs, will be severely curtailed or totally eliminated because there will be one person doing the job of two. I urge you to restore this position or advocate that the Board restores it. Keep the quality of our gifted programs high - we need all the programs, involvement and encouragement that wePage 2 can get for our children. It means a lot to the children as well as to the parents. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. Very truly yours, Kathryn C. Fitzhugh cc: Magnet Review Committee Lz/Dr. Margie Powell Ms. Margaret Gremillion Ms. Sadie Mitchell Dr. Linda Pondexter !i i 1995 ice Ct J' . .'J May 6, 1995 Mrs. Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Ste 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Powell, As a gifted specialist in the Little Rock School District, I am very concerned about the decision made by the Little Rock School District Board of Directors on April 27, 1995, to eliminate the District's administrative position of the Gifted and Talented Coordinator. With only one District G\u0026amp;T Supervisor remaining to serve the GT programs in our 49 schools, I forsee the quality of our programs deteriorating. One person can't be responsible for the administrative duties and the direct services provided to the students and gifted specialists. If there is any action that can be taken by you to help get Mrs. Diane Rynders' position reinstated, please do so. Sincerely, Beverly Kinneman Gifted Specialist Otter Creek Elementary HAY- 9-95 TUE 15:29 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 P. 06 May 7, 1995 Dear Judge Wright, I am sure that you really don't want to receive another letter regarding the budget cuts proposed by Dr. Williams for the Little Rock School District, but I felt compelled to write to let you know how I feel about the elimination of the Gifted and Talented coordinator position. In the ten years I have been teaching at Central I have seen many changes occur. Many good and certainly many bad. One of the most positive things that has occured is the appointment of Diane Rynders to the GT Coordinator position. Before her arrival, the GT office was at best in turmoil. I had many dealings with the people in that office at that time and it was my impression that there wa.s absolutely no leadership and continunity occuring Since Diane arrived things have been well organized and directed. I always know who to contact and what is expected of teachers in the district who work with gifted students. One of the things that I most look forward to during the school is the few hours a week I get to work with my Odyssey of the Mind team. These students are truly gifted. You would be amazed at what these young people can do. There is nothing that they can't accomplish if they put their minds to it. It is refreshing to see students at this advanced level at such a young age. The few hours a day that I work with these students is time where I know 1 am not going to have to deal with the extraneous non-teaching chores that occur all day long in my regular classes. During my regular teaching day most of my time is spent with discipline and reprimands which unfortunately turn what should be a positive teaching atmosphere into an aggravation. I look forward to the time I spend with my OM team. It is always fun and positive, the highlight of many of my working days I can't think of what will happen if the GT office loses its coordinator, much less losing Mrs. Rynders. There has to be other ways to reduced the deficit at the district. The administration is top heavy in other directions if cuts need to be made. Sacrifices have to be made by all, but 1 honestly feel that this is a terrible mistake and very little thought went in to making this descision. One thing for sure. Many students will not attend Little Rock Schools if the Gifted Programs are not fully functioning One of the main attractions is the many GT classes and programs available to students who need them and parents who want their children in them. The elimination of this position needs serious reconsideration on everyone's part. I really appreciate your time. I hope things will work out where the GT Cooridinator's position can remain intact Please feel free to contact me if you need any additional input. Central High School RSCfi-Jyarp, '^'fUGKr 0 9 1995 S. ^ISTFilCTOffice 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 (SOI) 3710100 May 8, 1995 Ms. Jill Clogston, Supervisor, Gifted Education Northeast Arkansas Educational Cooperative P.O. Box 100 Strawberry, AR 72469-0100 Dear Ms. Clogston: Judge Susan Webber Wright has asked me to respond to your letter in which you express concern about the elimination of the gifted and talented coordinators position in the Little Rock School District. Although she is sensitive to the concerns that community members have about the desegregation process and related issues, as a matter of policy, Judge Wright does not correspond directly with citizens. Instead, she relies upon us in her Office of Desegregation Monitoring to discuss school matters with individuals and organizations. As an Associate Monitor on the staff, one of my responsibilities is to monitor gifted and talented education in the three Pulaski County School districts. I have been contacted by several citizens from across the state expressing concern, alarm, and dismay at the proposal by the superintendent of the Little Rock School District to eliminate the position of Coordinator of Gifted and Talented education. Our involvement with the LRSD is limited to monitoring compliance with provisions in their desegregation plan, and gifted education is a component of the districts plan. The LRSD is required to obtain court approval for any action that might have an adverse impact on implementing their plan. The court has not given the district approval to make the proposed change, and I will recommend against approval. Although 1 cannot speak for Judge Wright, I believe she will give strong consideration to my recommendation. I suggest that you forward a copy of your letter to the Board of Education. It is my understanding that a parent group has petitioned for a special board meeting to address the elimination of the coordinators position. If you are interested in attending the meeting, you may call the districts central office at (501) 324-2(X)O or me at (501) 376-62(X), for the date and time of the school board meeting. 'gie L. Powell Associate Monitor MAY- 8-95 MON 11:28 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P.Ol Randolph \u0026amp; Harding Streets P 0. Box 217. Hoxie. AR 72433-0217 886-7717  Fax: (501) 886-7719 Central Office Teacher Center G-T / Reading! Special Ed Early Childhood NORTHEAST ARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVE d 206 South Main P.O. Box 100, .Strawberry, AR 72469-0100 S28-3395  Fax: (501) 528-3396 Computer Services, Media Resources Regional Services (SED) 5crving Since 19S4 LEAS In: Clay County Clay County Central Coming Piggott Greene County Delaplaine Gieene County Tech Mtimvaduke Northeast Arkansas Jackson County Jackson County Swifton Lawrence County Black Bock Hoxie Lynn River Valley Sloan-Hendrix Walnut Ridge Randolph County Biggers-Reyno Maynard Oak Ridge Central Focal,ontas Sharp County Cave City Willjford MAY i iYn May 4, 19 95 0fries of Os. -.y 1 .V.oiiiccung Honorable Susan Webber Wright Office of Desegregation \u0026amp; Monitoring 201 E. Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Honorable Susan Webber Wright\nS-2 I This letter is in response to the Little Rock School District cutting the position of Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Coordinator. 3m a colleague of Mrs. Diane Rynders, who has that position. Through her efforts she has established an exemplary Gifted Education program. Mrs. Rynders is involved with curriculum development, program monitoring for all elementary schools in the district, and identification of gifted students. During the past five years, students have been given the opportunity to participate in programs such as Odyssey of the Mind and Quiz Bowl, it is my fear that if this position is eliminated, the students will not be afforded these and other opportunities. One administrator cannot possibly handle the amount of work involved in coordinating a quality Gifted Education program for 4,000 students. Please consider reinstating this position for the students of Little Rock School District. consideration, Thank you for your Sincere, ill Clogston upervisor of Gifted Education May 0 3 1935J1h^-95 mon 11:28 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P.Ol Raxulolph \u0026amp; Harding Streets P 0. Box 217. Hoxie. AR 72433-0217 886-7717  Fax\n(501) 886-7719 Central Office Teacher Center G-T ! Reading t Special Ed Early Childhood NORTHEAST ARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVE 206 South Maia P.O. Box 100. Straw'beny. AR 72469-0100 528-3395  Fax\n(501) 525-3396 Computer Services, Media Resources Regional Services (SED) Sening Since 19S4LEAS In: May 4, 1995 Clay County Clay County Central Coming Piggott Greene County Delaplaine Greene County Tech Mannaduke Noitheast Arkansas Jackson County Jackson County Swifton Lawrence County Black Rock Hpxic Lynn River Valley Sloan-Hendrix Walnut Ridge Randolph County Bi^gcrs-Reyno Maynard Oak Ridge Central PocaliontAs Sharp County Cave City WiHiford Honorable Susan Webber Wright Office of Desegregation \u0026amp; Monitoring 201 E. Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Honorable Susan Webber Wright: S-3 I This letter is in response to the Little Rock School District cutting the position of Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Coordinator. . I a  colleague of Mrs. Diane Rynders, who has that position. Thrrough herr efffforrtts sshe hass established an exemplary Gifted Education program. Mrs. Rynders is involved with curriculum development, program monitoring for all elementary schools in the district, and identification of gifted students. During the past five years, students have been given the opportunity to participate \"- ----------- of the Mind and Quiz Bowl. in programs such as Odyssey . . , _ It is my fear that if this position is eliminated, the students will not be afforded these and other opportunities. One administrator cannot possibly handle the amount of work involved in coordinating a quality Gifted Education program for 4,000 students. Please consider reinstating this position for the students of Little Rock School District. consideration. Thank you for your Sincere, ill Clogston upervisor of Gifted Education OS 133^ Us. ^'STRfCT judge: cc\nCc. MAY-16-95 TUE 14:51 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 09 RECEIVED May 9, 1995 MAY 1 6 1995 Honorable Susan Webber Wright U.S. District Judge 600 West Capitol Ave. Little Rock, Ark. 72201 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Dear Judge Wright: I am writing to you as a concerned parent of a student in the Little Roch School District. 1995, District's Coordinator. the Little administrative We have learned, Rock School Board voted that on April 27, to eliminate the position of Gifted and Talented As you may or may not know this position is responsible for monitoring the district and thereby insuring a strong program for each school in the District. If this position is eliminated it will harm each of the students who are enrolled in the District's Gifted and Talented program and in my opinion just further students\". increase the Districts ability to \"Dumb down it's We need this program to insure that our brightest and best students are challenged by their teachers and their District and are able to continue their advanced learning by allowing this person to continue conducting in-service training of school staffs, P.T.A. needs. groups and developing educational plans for students with special In closing I would hope that you will not allow the District to do this and for one time will let them know that the welfare of our students should come first. I so apprecriate you and what you have and are continuing to do for us and for our students. Sincerely, I Tom Brock 8207 Crystal Valley Cove Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Rece\n5VS\no II I I MAY 111995 u. s. district judge MAY- 9-95 TUE 15:29 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 05 students to remain in their district, one would want to adversely effect the quality of a program seen as a positive and attracting element of the district. I would also like to add that Mrs. Rynders has been very active, due to her position, in statewide associations. While operating within these circles she has been able to act as a strong advocate on behalf of the students from her district. This year a minority student from the LRSD is attending my AEGIS program. It was beneficial for the student that he was coming from Diane's program. She is strong advocate for her students, but this type of activity will never show up on any report to the Superintendent or the Court. a In closing, I urge you to please consider the damage that will be done to the G/T program, but more importantly to all G/T students, should this position be eliminated. read in a report that 90% of every federal dollar, for I education, is spent on remedial programs and only .1% is spent for high ability learners. I hope you take a stand against this trend. Respectfully yours. John W. Calaway Supervisor of Gifted Education ie: Jackie S. Clark 7721 ClaybrookRoad. Mabelvale. AR 72103 May 10, 1995 M4y ? Dr. Henry Williams Little Rock School Superintendent 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 -3 Dear Dr. Williams: I am deeply concerned about the elimination of the Gifted and Talented Coordinator. I have two children that will be directly affected by loss of service in this area. In fact, when we made the decision 5 years ago to take our children out of private school and place them in public school, the Gifted and Talented program was a major motivation. My children are will be in the 10th and 11 grades in the 95-96 schcxjl year at J.A. Fair High School. Both have all \"GT\" courses, and should this particular program be adversely affect^, it would have a tremendous impact on my decision regarding remaining in Pulaski County. Although I hope to sell my home within the next few months and move outside the county, my children want to request transfers back into the school district because they not only enjoy their schools, but I feel like they are getting a good education in the process. I would appreciate your strong consideration. I know that not only \"GT\" students, but all students are affected by the programs that are a part of the Gifted and Talented Coordinators position. We need to take out the \"fat\", but we need to leave the \"meat and potatoes\" in the administrative structure. Respeci mLu- Jackie S.vCl^k cc: Magnet Review Committee Margie Powell/Office of Desegregation Monitoring tMAY-16-95 TUE 14:48 SUSAN H WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 P. 04 May 12, 1995 RECESVSa MAY I 6 1995 CHAft 3(_}crA.M KAff: E Office of Desegregation Monitoring MAY 15 1995 Dr. Henry Williams LRSD Superintendent[ 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR. 72201 'J. S. DtSTFJfCT Dear Dr. Williams: distr^bVe5\\\nTaSVo^- \"gij't^ has Little Rock School District talented sending you a copy to parents of been students in the sicnooi Dxstrict. We rcaciniz(a rhat- t-y,  i-ne tnne for you in identifying specific artas difficult sincerely believe however t-bat-  budget cuts. We Talented Coordinator positioA ,iu ad?lSSv''iff.r? and r?= ill the discontinuation or and successful programs. iscontinuation of direct services the We appreciate the _se?sion on Vy 17?^ iVsT. on May 17, 1995. children in the Gifted/Tal\\ As advocates for you and the hoard ot directors ilf^eoonside^lh'e 7e eliminate the position of Gifted and Sincerely, c Mills \\ Elementary A.G.A.T.E. Parent Elizabeth Bowell Secondary A.G.A.T.E. CC: Parent Honorable Susan Webber Wright Anne Brown - ODM LRSD Board of Directors LRSD Administrators Dr. Patty Kohler, Division of Magnet Review Committee Exceptional Children of Education Director James Smith - Superintendent of NLRSD ' Gene Wilhoit Bobby Lester John Walker  Superintendent of PCSSDcc \\ HAY-16-95 TUE 14:49 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 RE May 2, 1995 6 1995 Dear Parents of Children in Gifted and Talented Programs, Office of Desegregation Monitoring The Little Rock School District Board of Directors voted April 27, 1995, to eliminate the - - District's administrative position of Gifted and Talented Coordinator. There will be only one district position (District G \u0026amp; T Supervisor) remaining to serve the G\u0026amp;T programs in our forty-nine (49) schools. The Supervisor will be responsible for all administrative duties, thereby, severely restricting the amount of time that can be given to direct services and support to the G.T. Specialists. It is urgent you be informed about how this budget cut will directly effect your child. We also need your help to reverse this sudden, unexpected action by the LRSD Board of Directors and district administration. The Gifted and Talented Coordinator works in direct support of our G \u0026amp; T Specialists by providing continuity of the G.T. curriculum throughout the district, thereby insuring strong programs in each school. This position is responsible for monitoring programs and records, finalizing the G.T. identification process for each child, conducting in-service training for school staffs, PTA groups, and A.G.A.T.E. (Arkansans for Gifted and Talented Education) meetings, and developing educational plans for students with special needs. Furthermore, this position is responsible for organizing Odyssey of the Mind, Quiz Bowl, and Sixth Grade Challenge competitions. These special events are open to ALL students, However, these will no longer be available to students if the elimination of this position stands. All students ultimately benefit from the Gifted and Talented program, because the G.T. Specialists share curriculum, strategies, and learning tools with the classroom teachers to provide enrichment opportunities for all children. In order to save this position, please help by doing one or all of the following\n1. Contact your LRSD Board Representative and let them know you want this position maintained, see attached\n2. Write or call the LRSD Administration, 324-2000\n3.- Attend the Special Session of the LRSD Board of Directors meeting concerning this issue, date to be announced\n4. Contact the Office of the Desegregation Monitoring, Ann 376-6200. Brown or Margie Powell 5. It is very important that parents write to the Honorable Susan Webber Wright District Judge, 600 W. Capitol, Little Rock, AR 72201. Children in the Gifted and Talented Programs deserve to have challenging programs to aid them in fulfilling their highest potential. When the school district attempts to dismantle or severely compromise successful programs, then we, immediate action. as parents, are obligated to take For further information regarding this issue please contact either Barbara Mills, 664-5681 or Elizabeth Dowell, 834-3720. Barbara Mills Elementary A.G.A.T.E. Parent Elizabeth Dowell Secondary A.G.A.T.E. Parent cc : HAY-16-95 TUE 14:50 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P, 06 \u0026gt;\u0026lt;44/ 1 6 . DHice of VICTOR A. FLEMING 5405 Sherwood Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 ftECEsVSD CHA.MEIEHS OF SiJSAN WRIGHT MAY 15 1995 ^(^segregation Monitoniiy Home (501) 661-1758 Work 376-3800 ! FAX 372-3359 U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE May 11, 1995 Dear Friends, Please pardon the mass-mail letter format. Immediate help is needed and hereby requested. I'll be brief. When the School Board adopted Dr. Hank Williams' latest budget cut recommendation (see enclosed article), it axed a position that should not have been axed. Tliat position is the Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Coordinator, currently held by Diane Rynders. Possibly this position was placed in the cut package by mistake, possibly not. I am researching that even as this letter is being written. A special meeting of the Little Rock School Board will be held at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, May 17 to allow opponents of this particular positions being cut to present their case. I hope I can count on you to write a letter to Judge Susan Wright, with a copy to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, expressing your desire that this position not be cut. This position is one of only two G/T positions at the LRSD's administration level. That is, half die staff for this aspect of public education will be eliminated. The coordinator has taken die lead in LRSD's outstanding participation in Quiz Bowl, Odyssey of tho Mind, Junior Groat Boolcc, Sixth Grad* Challenge, and Monitoring Programr. 1 have coached a Gibbs Magnet Schotil Odyssey of the Mind team for the past two years, and I can tell you that Ms. Rynders put in yeoman's hours and effort on that program. She was diere when odicrs were not for any potential problem. But diis effort to retain the position she holds is not about h^ndividually. To cut half tile administrative staff of the G/T program sends the wrong message to tlie folks we want to try to keep in tlie Little Rock public school system. I have stuck with the system (kids at Forest Park, Pulaski Heiglits Jr. High, Central, and Gibbs) through thick and thin primarily because of programs such as G/T, which administers exceptionally positive strokes to students on a totally color-blind basis. Please write Judge Wright a letter or post card, stating \"1 oppose tlie elimination of the Gifted/Talented Coordinators position at LRSD\" or words to dial effect, and send a copy to Ann Brown, the desegregation monitor. Their addresses are on tlie back of this letter. T\" /jtJO coMi. -b Ke Ttijh' I if. i V V \\ f,' 1\u0026amp;\n ll I*.. j MAY-22-95 MON 10i57 X h\u0026lt;jcAVZ- 7'. #  rr Ba SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 G. RICHARD SMITH, M.D. j \u0026lt;v^4 P.'QS i. Tc: .  h s/hill'S \"11 r, 1)1) ( 'f' \u0026gt; ife 4 j'. J. t. -.  f .' .'Y J bfM^ \"U' V V. .\u0026lt; (^1: J. T- '? ' ' .J '1\n1 r- y: .' i\u0026lt; p:  ' h 'T^'' I y' I\"*? I -X .1 z J\u0026lt; Vr^'.\u0026lt;-.- 1 *1 MtW ^hHS] 1^- V r S:- K rv. ZA \u0026gt; W-.v *1 '1 T'i 1 3 it f:  ' 41s aa MAY-22-95 MON 10:57 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 #2 Melinda Drive Little Rock, AR 72209 May 18, 1995 I t-: P. 04 Henry Williajvis LRSD Superintendent 810 W. tSarkham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Williams, I am writing this letter in regards to the Gifted and Talented Coordinator position being eliminated. schools. I feel this is a very important program in our It must not be restricted to just one supervisor to serve the 49 schools or 4000 students involved. It is an excellent program that my child has enjoyed. He has had the opportunity to be involved in many things he would not have in a regular classroom iithese children need this extra encouragement. They need more than one supervisor to organise these project^. The LRSD needs to look in another direction to cut the budget. These teachers along with their supervisors are doing a great job! My husband and I would have been at the meeting last night, but we could not be there by 5:30pm. However, we do want our opinion on the subjected noted. Ihank you for this consideration. We would like for our children to excel at school. Please DO NOT make thi's budget cut. / Sincerely, I Mrs. Dan M. Walker cc: Honorable Susan Webber Wright District Judge 600 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Magnet Review Conniittee 1920 N. Main North Little Rock, AR 72114 Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 tergaret Gremillion Assistant Superintendent - Elementary 810 W. Markliam Little Rock, AR 72201 Sadie Mitchell Assi-stant Superintendent \" Elementary 810 W. Markliam Little Rock, AR 72201 Dick Hurley LRSD Human Resource.s 810 W. Markliam Little Rock, AR 72201 P- ' nntI3 i MAY-22-95 MON 10:58 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 VICTOR A, FLEMING 3801 TCBT Tower LUtle Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376^3800 t FMl 372-3359 Honorable Katherine P, Mitchell Member Little Rock School Board 1605 Welch Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Dear Ms. Mitchell: May 18, 1995 P. 05 I First, Im sorry you weie uanble to attend the special meeting of the Little Rock School Board on Wednesdayj May 17. 1995. On behalf of all the persons who are opposed to cutting the GT Coordinators position, the Boards allowing us to present our case is very much appreciated. Second, let me encourage you in the strongest of terms to be bold and courageous and remove the GT Coordinators position from the administrative slots that have been set forth in the cut that you approverl last month. As was demonstrated by all of the persons who spoke against cutting this slot, it is perceived to be integral to the operation of an extremely important program. As I indicated in my remarks to the Board, the payment of this persons salary, at the present time nt least, is very much like the payment of au insurance policy tliat protects one's home, business, or automobile from calamities Uiat are hoped will never occur. The GT program is something the Little Rock School District should be extremely proud of and the issue of cutting half of the aduiinisirative positions designed lo maintain this fine program is one that should not be entered into unadvisedly or in haste of any sort. Should you Siiicqi'i Vidiof k VAF/c^ IcdlidtOlM cc: Lve que.stions or comments, please feel free to call. M.S. Caryn Taulbee Ms. Barbara Mills t r S3 (J MAY-22-95 MON 10:58 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 1 P, 06 VICTOR A. FLEMING 3801 TCBY Tower Little Rock, Arktutsas 72201 (501) 376-3800 ! FAX 372-3359 May 18, 1995 Honorable T. Kevin OMalley Member Little Rock School Board 24 Glenmere Drive Little Rock, AR 72204 Dear Mr. OMaUey\nFirst, let me once again thank you for your courteous participation and attention at the si\u0026gt;ecial meeting of the Little Rock School Board on Wednesday, May 17, 1995. I know that was tinie you might rather have been spending with friends or family elsewhere but, on behalf of all the persons who are opposed to cutting the GT Coordinators position, your aUowing us to present our case is very much appreciated. Second let me encourage you in the strongest of terms to be bold and courageous and remove the GT Coordinalors position front the administrative slots that have been set forth in the cut that you approved last month. As demonstrated by all of tlie persons who spoke against cutting this slot, it is perceived to be integral to the operation of an extremely important program, As I indicated in my remarks to tlie Board, the payment of this persons salary, at the present time at least, is very much like tlie payment of an insurance policy that protects ones home, business, or automobile from calamities that are hoped will never occur,. The GT program is .something the Little Rock School District should be extremely proud of and the issue of cutting half of the administrative positions designed to maintain this fine program is one that should not be entered into unadvisedly or in baste of any sort. Should you have questions or comments, please feel free to call. Sincerely, Victor A, Fleming VAF/cf cc: Ms. Caryn Taulbee Ms. Barbara MillsBB Ba s k' MAY-22-95 MON 10:59 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 07 yiCIOH A. FLEMING 33(11 TCBY Toy^\u0026gt;er Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-3300 ! FAX 372-3359 May 18, 1995 Honorable Judy Magness Secretary Little Rock School Board 708 Hall Drive Little Rock, AR 121^5 Dear Ms. Magness\nFirst, let me once again thank you for your courteous participation and attention at the special meeting of the Little Rock School Board on Wednesday, May 17, 1995. I know that was time you might rather have been spending with friends or family elsewiiere but, on behalf of all the persons who are opposed to cutting tlie GT Coordinators position, your allowing us to present our case is very much appreciated. Second, let me encourage you in the strongest of terms to be bold and courageous and remove the QT Coordinators position from the administrative slots that have been set forth in the cut that you approved last month. As demonstrated by all of the persons who spoke against cutting tliis slot, it is perceived to be integral to the operation of an extremely important program. As I indicated in my remarks to the Board, tire payment of this persons salary, at the present time at least, is very much like the payment of an insurance policy that protects ones home, business, or automobile from calamities that arc hoped will never occur. Tlie GT program is something the Little Rock School District should be extremely proud of and the issue of cutting half of the administrative positions designed to maintain tliis fine program is one that should not be entered into unadvisedly or in haste of any sort. Should you have questions or comments, please feel free to call. Sincerely, Victor A, Fleming VAF/cf IrvllttLOW cc\nMs. Caryn Taulbee Ms. Barbara MillsnAY-22-95 MON 11:OO SUSAN W WRIGHT I FAX NO, 5013246576 P. 08 VICTOR A. ITEMING 3801 TCBY Tower JMe Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-3800 ! FAX 372-3359 May 18,1995 Honorable John A. Riggs Member Little Rock School Board 3600 Foxcroft Little Rock, AR 72207 Dear Mr. Rigg.s: First, let me once again thank you for your courteous participation and attention at the special meeting of the Little Rock Scliool Board on Wednesday, May 17, 1995. I know that was time you might rather have been spending with friends or family elsewhere but, on behalf of all the persons who are opposed to cutting the GT Coordinators position, your allowing us to present our case is very much appreciated. L 1^' Second, let me encourage you in the strongest of terms to be bold and courageous and remove the GT Coordinaiors position from the administrative slots that have been set forth in the cut that you approved last month. As demonstrated by all of the persons who sjxike against cutting this slot, it is perceived to be integral to the operation of an extremely important program. As I indicated in my remarks to the Board, lite payment of tlris persons salary, at the present time at least, is very much like the payment of an insurance policy that protects ones home, business, or automobile from calamities that are hoped will never occur. 'Fhe GT program is something the Little Rock School District should he extremely proud of and the issue of cutting half of the administrative positions designed to maintain this fine program is one that should not be entered into unadvis^ly or in haste of any sort. Should you have questions or comments, please feel free to call. Sincerely, Victor A. Fleming VAF/cf IndleCuOM cc: Ms, Caryn Taulbee Ms. Barbara Mills A  -/r' - . 'a* \"  '^7MAY-22-95 MON 11:00 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P, 09 I \" I j VICWR A. FLEMING 3801 TCBi' Tower Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (SOI) 376-3800 ! FAX 372-3359 May 18, 1995 t I Honorable Patricia Gee Vice President Little Rock School Board 8409 Dowaii Drive Little Rock, AR 72209 Dear Ms. Gee\nFirst, let me once again thank you for your courteous participation and attention at the special meeting of the Little Rock School Board on Wednesday, May 17, 1995. I know that was time you might rather have been spending with friends or family elsewhere but, on behalf of all the persons who are opposed to cutting the GT Coordinators position, your allowing us to present our case is very much appreciated. Second, let me encourage you tn the strongest of terms to be bold and courageous and remove the GT Coordinators position from the administrative slots that have been set forth in Uie cut that you approved last month. As demonstrated by all of the persons who spoke against cutting tliis slot, it is perceived to be integral to tlie operation of an extremely unportant program. As I uidicated in my remarks to the Board, die payment of this persons salary, at the present time at least, is very much like the payment of an insurance policy tliat protects ones home, business, or automobile from calamities that are hoped will never occur. The GT program is something tlie Little Rock School District should be extremely proud of and the issue of cutting half of the administrative positions designed to maintain litis fine program is one that should not be entered into unadvisedly or in haste of any sort. Should you have questions or comments, please feel free to call. Sincerely, \\)lv Victor A, Fleming VAFZcf U\u0026gt;(l(ea,W4 cc: Ms. Caryn Taulbee Ms. Barbara Mills I . .V ei 9 ! a s s i 4 JMAY-22-85 MON 11:01 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 I P. 10 V/CTOR A. FLEMING 3801 TCBY Tower Little Bock, Arkunsas 72201 (501) 376-3800 f FAX 372-3359 May 18, 1995 Honorable Linda Pondexter Pre.sident Little Rock School Board 502 Green Mountain Drive, #56 Little Rock, AR 72211 Dear Ms. Pondexter\nFirst, let me once again thank you for your courteous participation and attention at tlie special meelbig of the Little Rock School Board on Wednesday, May 17, 1995. I know that was time you might rather have been spending with friends or family elsewhere but, on behalf of all the persons who are op{X)sed to cutting the GT Coordinators position, your allowing us to present our case is very much appreciated. I Second, let me encourage you in the strongest of terms to be bold and courageous and remove the GT Coordinators position from tlie administrative slots that have been set forth in the cut that you approved last inonlli. As demonstrated by all of the persons who spoke against cutting this slot, it is perceived to be integral to tlie operation of an extremely important program. As I indicated in my remarks to the Board, the payment of this persons salary, at die present time at least, is very much like the payment of an insurance policy that protects ones home, business, or automobile from calamities that are lioped will never occur. Ilie GT program is something the Llitlc Rock School District should be extremely proud of and the issue of culling half of tlie administrative positions designed to maintain this fine program is one that .should not be entered into unadvisedly or in haste of any sort. Should you have questions or conunents, please feel free to call. Sincferely, t Victor A. Fleming VAF'/cf U4dlf4L004 cc: Ms, Caryn Taulbee Ms. Barbara Mills S' anBtsanRBHmHRiMAY-22-95 MON 11:01 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P.ll 2908 Lee Avenue Little Rock, AR 72205 May 13, 1995 Hon. Susan Wright, U.S. District Judge U.S. Courthouse 600 West Capitol Little Rock. AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: We believe that the Gifted and Talented Program is essential to the success of the Little Rock public school system, and oppose the elimination of the Gifted/Talented  Coordinator's position from the Little Rock School System. .17\n.,1 Through our own experience with two children and almost nine years of public school attendance, we are convniced of the importance of such programs as Odyssey of the Mina and Quiz Bowl We strongly feel that the District should be encouraging academic excellence through the expansion of programs such as these. To eliminate the position of Gifted and Talented Coordinator would reduce the stalling for this important arc\n, at the administrative level by half This seems to strike at the heart of the mission of pub-schools We believe that Gifted and Talented programs are essentials, not frills, ana ask that you help to encourage such programs by retaining the coordinator's position I sorely, -7 CgTaJcVv'-- 3 :'3 'avid and Terry Cowan copy Arm Brown Oftice of Desegregation Monitoring ... 16 ?995 J It l^lSTFUcy JUDgit I %1R J ai MAY-15-1996 09:05 GEv'ER SPRINGS RBC 501 5b2 4189 I P.01 Sgggr springs first gaptist Church .1\u0026gt;6}5 Gpydr Springs TJ^oad  Littlp Pock, flp 7220*3 pbonsz .50J 365-347-f  FtIX 50t 5624189 To\n1 Of: _ From: A FfJX# 31/- 0/DG pagi^s\nlimfE\n*)ats2: Comments: i- I 4^ Sb -J s , \u0026lt; - -4. / I rz '^  'A A-i O ' r -izU 0 - LOt I 4 f /\u0026lt;\u0026gt; 'T' O ! S I a t  I MAY-15-1996 09:06 GEYER SPRINGS FBC 501 562 4189 P.82 May 15, ) Two roads diverged in a yeliow wood, and I- I took the one less travelled by. And that has made all the difference From now on each time I read this poem by Roben Frost, I will think of you - our special Senior Ciass of 1996. I will remember that, by choosing to continue with the Honors/AP program, you have metaphorically chosen a different path and, in this case, a more difficult one I will remember your perseverance in the face of so many assigned works to read, so many papers to write, so much red ink. ( 1 hope you know that sadism is not part of iny nature, but rather that 1 knew you were capable of excellence and that life demands attention to detail ) 1 will remember your courage as 1 played Devil s Advocate in discussions and tried to hold you accountable for generalized statements ( I hope you realize that I w ished not to change vour point of view, but t o strengthen it and that you will be held accountable in medicine and law, teaching, engineerinu, the ministry, business, and family life,) I will remember your endurance as you played volleyball, sottball, and baseball, golf, soccer, and tennis, as you ran track and put together the schooi newspaper, panicipated in drama productions and oratory contests and Superintendent's Cabinet and Mercantile Bank Board meetings You sang in the choir, played in the band, marched and cheered at every home game and many of those aw ay Some of you worked at afterschool iobs and several endured personal trauma and family trials. through -A? to the end and met all the deadlines You accomplished all this and still stayed You have surpassed my greatest expectations And. ccnsequentlv I want to thank you for that and for the new and unique perspectives you have given me on so many different subtects. Some people believe that studying the Humanities, literature in pamcular is a waste of time because these subjects do not help you make a better living. 1 would like to hope they will mak living better You have read of the nature of good and evil from Shakespeare and Golding, of e racism and Colonialism from Achebe . Existentialism from Hemingway, selfhood from Kafka, the impact of an unjust society on the individual from Wright, courage of conviction from Huck, the human tragedy that can result from those who blindly follow' tradition from Jackson, and the rewards of grit and determination from a little girl who named herself Ellen Foster and whose \"new mama\" showed us all what a loving parent should be We learn mainly from experience, of course, but we define and conceptualize through these things that come from books - the products of long hours and days of tbougnt and editing, visions and revisions, (to paraphrase Ellen Gilchrist ) the best parts of the best minds that have ever lived on earth, your real legacy from the educational svstem that no one can ever take from you in anyt MAY-15-1996 09=07 GEYER SPRINGS ^bc 501 562 4189 P.03 way As long as there are schoois a.nd libraries and free societie.s this wiil be waiting for you whenever vou wish to take it And lite will be better for vou when you do Some time ago at a party an acquaintance of ours, a businessman in the community, discussed the wonders of the corporate world with my husband for a few minutes and then turned to me - with incrediility, I thought- and asked why on earth I chose teaching as a career, especially in Arkansasyou can guess the rest I w'as stunned and could only answer at the moment that, well. 1 liked it It was a duesticn I could not let go of and, as w e so often do 1 replayed the moment in my mind I suppose 1 chose teaching initially because, except for Donna Reed . June Cleaver, and my own sweet mother, rny only role models were the strong, traditional women who taught me at Pulaski Heights and Central High Schoo! Later J stayed because, luckily, my salary was not the pnmary one tn our family But it is more than this - these are the superficial reasons If he reeled around at me once more, if I could replay that instant with all my wits about me. I would say, Why did I choose teaching Weli. it is because of Bryan and Jeremy, Clif. Ryan and Cheryl, Erica and Ashley, Liz, Sarah, .Alicia, Brigette, and Meredith. Tara, Leslie and Erin, John Paul. Corey, and Patrice, Tamika and Tamka, Dereka and Daphne. Laura, Brandi, Charnelle Amber and Stacy. And certainly it is also because of Cristy and Felicia. Jeremy H and Jason, Lizz. Hunter Jill ano Kara. Torrie and Angie. Tamara, Aronna. Kevin, Kelly, and Jeff, Allison and Ron. Kerne, Tametra, .Meivelyn, and Rusty.Kisa, Reesa, and Mackenzie \" May the sun snine warmly on your face, May the rain fall gently on your shoulders. May the roaa nse up to meet you, .'Vid may God always hold you in the palm of Kis Hand ..With iTiuch love, ,-7 \"AL P.03MAY-16-95 TUE 14:51 SUSAN M WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 cz. i P, 09 RECEIVED May 9, 1995 MAY I 6 1995 Honorable Susan Webber Wright U.S. District Judge 600 West Capitol Ave. Little Rock, Ark. 72201 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Dear Judge Wright: I am writing to you as a concerned parent of a student in the Little Rock School District. 1995, District's Coordinator, Che Little administrative We have learned, Rock School Board voted that on April 27, to eliminate the position of Gifted and Talented As you may or may not know this position is responsible for monitoring the district and thereby insuring a strong program for each school in the District. If this position is eliminated it will harm each of the students who are enrolled in the District's Gifted and Talented program and in my opinion just further students\". increase the Districts ability to \"Dumb down it' s We need this program to insure that our brightest and best students are challenged by their teachers and their District and are able to continue their advanced learning by allowing this person to continue conducting in-service training of school staffs, P.T.A. groups and developing educational plans for students with special needs. In closing I would hope that you will not allow the District to do this and for one time will let them know that the welfare of our students should come first. I so apprecriate you and what you have and are continuing to do for us and for our students. Sincerely, i Tom Brock 8207 Crystal Valley Cove Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 I Recen/go may 111995 I U. S. DISTRICT JUDGEiC-.' MAY-16-95 TUE 14:51 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 08 DON 31 ^31 QAI63YIULE PIKE JACKSONVILLE AR 12W ^icAoCa i':\u0026gt;tc ii) eLJ)ef I/-)/jiff REGEfVSO J/rci r /o! Cl -iAivirig-^s: \u0026lt; SIjS.AN vv^i 3ia VV?\n1GHT J 6 J995 may 12 1995 Office of Desegregation ftfloiiiionng Tc^c? (' U. S. DfSTRfCT JUDGE 73 f /'\u0026gt;t I' iij pi f/hii h/ C^ffry/'fa fcr fh/ 1^'^/'*''y pr^'/''O/\\. affech a h p ' VA o ri'/ t, c\u0026gt; I I. !y th. //^\u0026lt; pyjy/c. 7i^- G li\\ -^chd!.5dhc-f\u0026lt;5 I  r Cl f/\u0026gt; f t\u0026lt; r-f/^c^ / /Q U 7i\\^ d. y-b]5racti. /rvcker^ //\u0026gt; errc7^^./yiy c'/'UfrA- ThfC ^ypr^ial hr { ^/if'lrhar//. i/ds. fri'^ /hr I'f/ /h r^yc i/dS. I. 0 C6orii'^^^r I r/ii/e. 'h Jz-yf  dcr^ a. d-e- Cr-.UJ yi \\-ull~ // T^ If . 7/a! .1 /o Gllq S^id//ddz'ily. rc, a (l/'i/:' /r'/n-i^/i'///! 5f/-c:ci r.a/ii/-i' '1 u. J\" '/id f/^^z '/. 7'\n='^ r2i55 11 yj cf:' ait. rd c. rid.'/u/ii ^wy fd '/G'^C. I'/Cdi//\u0026lt;'/ J .-hl /h/'-y/^ 1^! !/^ -}h //yi^ i'l if /h. (f/- -h / ,.7, 'h ClD'I. !.(.{, prrrr' (/rL, ! C. (.( /I d\", r, \u0026lt;/. '\u0026gt;. /f/lA e\u0026lt;^/\\r-^/GL^ 7cc: HAY-16-95 TUE 14:50 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 07 0 OtIiCQ of W4r 1995 ^^^^aregation Arkansas Association Gifted Education Adininistratoi Route 1, Box 2 Plumen-ille, Arkansas 72127 May 10, 1995 Honorable Judge Wright: Connoting irs This is in regard to Little Rock School District's number of Gifted \u0026amp; Talented position in reducing the Administrators . I fad that one administrator quality of Gifted \u0026amp; cannot maintain the District has Talented Education which the Wane iM'lershl\nP of Mrs. Rynders has pre-monitoring for all worked with curriculum development, of students,i\nadditlt^L\"\"n^^'^ \"tification Sixth Gradechaditgi etc I ask that Little Rock Schon.1 this position. ennsider reinstating R incerely, President Arkansas Association Gifted Education Administrators K-ti'CSrui. n Xi 15 DISTRICT JUcr\n^MAY-16-95 TUE 14:50 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 Office cc: jtJi, P. 07 J 6/995-- Arkansas Association Gifted Education Administrators Route 1, Box 2 Plumerville, Arkansas 72127 May 10, 1995 Honorable Judge Wright: Des, ^nitor,ng This is in regard to Little position in reducing the Administrators . Rock School District * s number of Gifted \u0026amp; Talented I feel that one administrator quality of Gifted \u0026amp; Talented District has cannot maintain the Education which the Mrs. Rynders has worked pre-monitoring for all ,\nwith curriculum development, of Students,in addition^Jrorfv^'^ schools, identification Sixth Grade Challenge, etc. Mind, Quiz Bowls, I ask that Little Rock Schon.1 this position. \u0026gt;. ennsider reinstating Sincerely, Pally Bakker President Arkansas Association Gifted Education Administrator 5 op' I':P,wr.?iGHT -15 1.995 ^-OflSrRlCTJLJuc\n^-f- ./AA)'AWKAWM k f 1 I JohnMf* LO0 Ciz WESTERN ARKANSAS EDUCATION SERVICE COOPERATIVE Guy Fenter, Director RR 1 Box 104 Branch Arkansas 72928 1 i, if iWi a fl 965-2191 635-5201 RECEIVED CHAMBERS pF SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT may 1X 1995 o.u'm! 9fiE Serving public schools In... Crawford County... Alma Cedarville Mountainburg Mulberry Van Buren MAY 1 1 1995 Office of Desegregaiion Monitoring May 9, 1995 Franklin County... Altus-Denning Charleston County Line Ozark Pleasant View Tke Honorable Susan Webber Wrigkt Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 , Mar ft. Earn Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wrlgfit\nJohnson County... Clarksville Lamar Oark Westside I am writing on bekalf of Diane Rynders position of Assistant Coordinator of Gifted and Talented Programs for tke Little Rock ScAoof District, Superintendent kas \"cut\" It is my understanding tfiat tke Littie Rock tkis position from funding for tke fiscal year beginning in July 1993 as one of several \"cuts\" deemed as unnecessary expenditures. I find tkis Cine of reasoning to be guite Logan County... Booneville Magazine Paris Scranton inappropriate and inaccurate based on my own understanding of hfs. Rynders and wkat ske kas done for tke gifted and talented programs in tke Little Rock District. Diane Rynders kas worked kard to develop a fine staff of teojckers in tke gifted and talented program wko are knowledgeable of tke area Scott County... Waldron and informed about tke various types of assessment wkick can and is 6cing done to assess students in your district in order to fairly treat all populations represented. Ske kas gone out of ker way to Sebastian County... Fort Smith Greenwood Hackett Hartford Lavaca Mansfield try to find ways to appropriately identify and serve minority students wko kad not been previously identified prior to ker tenure, Ske kas worked to develop community interest and support in tke GT programs, tke student projects, and worked to interrelate kigker fevcf tkinking skills wit kin tke regular curriculum. Ske kas worked witk tke GT teackers to develop a district-wide 6tk grade competition open to large numbers of students keld yearly in tke spring. It kas Migrant Service In... Conway County Crawford County Johnson County Logan County Pope County Scott County Sebastian County Yell County expanded tke understanding of kow giftedness can be skown in many ways to students, faculty, and parents alike. I am appaffed tkat tke Little Rock Superintendent could consider efforts suck as tkis to be \"unnecessary expenditures\". Tkis position is vital to tke efforts being undertaken to meet tke federal mandates establisked by tke courts to equalize services to all populations. Tke position, and especially tke individual in tke position, does muck to provide positive examples of wkat students are capable of doing to tke community and tke public at large. Students of all races are seen working together cooperatively to sofve problems in student competitions such as Odyssey of the Mind, Little Rock GT programs have been quite visible in Odyssey of the Mind, which focuses on creative endeavors of individuals working within a group to solve problems and not simply academics within a ciass room setting. It provides exposure to new experiences utitizing drama, music, and otAer visuai and fine arts as a part of tfie overaU problem solving. CfiiCdren of various ages, cCassrooms, races, and ability levels all work, together to develop solutions. Ms. Rynders has been instrumental in bringing individuals from other states who are considered experts at the national level to help in the identification of minorities, the training of teachers in observation techniques, and the coordination of ideas within the district to form an overall district plan. At the state level Ms. Rynders, as Assistant Coordinator of Gifted Programs, attends monthly meetings of all State GT Supervisors, is very active in the AGATE Conference each year and encourages her teachers to do so, is active in both regional and state level of Odyssey of the Mind Competitions, helps with district, regional, and state level quiz bowls at varying levels, encourages competitions of all sorts within the district, brings in new and innovative programs for the teachers to view and or adopt as a part of their curriculum. The area of gifted and talented services offers much which the average person on the street can see and react favorably towards. It /ocuscs Ort tAc child who is succeeding within the education system, not as is so often the case, the one who is failing or in some kind of trouble. It sheds a positive light on the Little Rock School District and is something that should be emphasized and expanded not in any way cut. I would hope that you would see fit to reinstate EAttrte Rynders in the position of Assistant Coordinator of Gifted and Talented Services for the Little Rock School District for the 1995-1996 school year. incM/ely, Carolyn P. 5Ary GT Supervisor cc\nVICTOR A. FLEMING 5405 Sherwood Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 MAY 1 5 1995 Home (501) 661-1758 Work 376-3800 / FAX 372-3359 Office of Desegregation Monitoring May 11, 1995 Dear Friends, Please pardon the mass-mail letter format. Immediate help is needed and hereby requested. 1'11 be brief. When the School Board adopted Dr. Hank Williams' latest budget cut recommendation (see enclosed article), it axed a position that should not have been axed. That position is the Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Coordinator, currently held by Diane Rynders. Possibly this position was placed in the cut package by mistake, possibly not. I am researching that even as this letter is being written. A special meeting of the Little Rock School Board will be held at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, May 17 to allow opponents of this particular position's being cut to present their case. I hope I can count on you to write a letter to Judge Susan Wright, with a cqjy to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, expressing your desire that this position not be cut. This position is one of only two G/T positions at the LRSD's administration level. That is, half the staff for this abject of public education will be eliminated. The coordinator has taken the lead in LRSD's outstanding participation in Quiz Bowl, Odyssey of the Mind, Junior Great Books, Sixth Grade Challenge, and Monitoring Programs. 1 have coached a Gibbs Magnet School Odyssey of the Mind team for the past two years, and I can tell you that Ms. Rynders put in yeoman's hours and effort on that program. She was there when others were not for any potential problem. But this effort to retain the position she holds is not about he^dividually. To cut half the administrative staff of the G/T program sends the wrong message to the folks we want to try to keep in the Little Rock public schooi system. I have stuck with the system (kids at Forest Park, Pulaski Heights Jr. High, Central, and Gibbs) through thick and thin primarily because of programs such as G/T, which administers exceptionally positive strokes to students on a totally color-blind basis. Please write Judge Wright a letter or post card, stating \"I oppose the elimination of the Gifted/Talented Coordinator's position at LRSD\" or words to that effect, and send a copy to Ann Brown, the desegregation monitor. Their addresses are on the back of this letter. T ALSO-PMo? .xrM\u0026gt;pJ4K) rX Ui I it's-J at u/iSTec : MAY-16-95 TUE 14:51 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 08 JACKSONVILLE AR 72076 bic Aus/en p'l^bicP i^y. Aa^yPo! , CHAM-T^g^S (\u0026gt;\n- SIjSAN vvnvrft^r.-\n? yjRlGHT ^ll\\X 12 1995 U. S. DfSTRfCT JUDGE -- RSOEIVBD may I 6 1995 Office of Desegregation MonitohnQ J^c'rZ r V/e (2 \"y rf/j b T^ht U- - torj''/ia/cr liA ffech \u0026gt;' '^-J-^- - I. u /\u0026gt;iS yk Q,P}J\ny, tP yy-b!^ \\Kto/ c I '/' r\u0026lt; I i/ ' d, I,,4^ ht'/au.-xe. 7-^J ^ , ! }/ I ' .J Aj/}-^ T\u0026gt;s/\u0026lt;i (J\u0026gt;7l\\ A-'x yhsr-x^ bt^tckty y ^A\u0026lt;2cni,^e,,- cbAJfM. rbtfc a(e^ 4ic ytclal %r fif h\u0026gt; jS^Z/rZ/'Z y'^'-:' PhC ixye. \u0026gt;(_ J 7c/. d\u0026gt;/^7j / I. 0 k, A Cta uJ.'/f ! sya'j^:\\ \\ f -jy r' Al f/Ac \u0026lt;-!' k' /rJJ\"- y /''^iP 22!^ y ii-itfC ^A/'2 A'L.^ bdt^/!^i ^ b Ayb S'b ,'i'f\u0026gt;/f b \u0026lt;^. e./ri '/(/ / e- ypccb' D cllq J' h / /Aas Q-/ J-l At 2 brj /y \u0026gt;\u0026gt; 7^ /i i/t recfn.bi^Ay y ~^i'C.\u0026gt;t:iiyj( t)' 7abipJ- iPi'\u0026lt;^''jriii'A l^\u0026gt; .f. Ik lt.i- Il I- .'J' I ?, |\u0026lt;r^.^:e^,^l'\u0026lt;J 'M pfO'c/t:- ^b' idi^''-. ^- rJH.ny '- ,y b j 1 /, I -/l^,,l tficKHc. Tt k. U cbJleyt^ /-'.p /M /I/' PIrs/'/'^f^ 'f'b / p/fie. (jC.t: MAY-16-95 TUE 14:50 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 06 'My J 6 ' Ellice of ^esegregai'on VICTOR A. FLEMING 5405 Sherwood Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 RECltP/SD CHAVL'EHS OF SUSAN WRIGHT MAY 15 1995 Monitoring Horae (501) 661-1758 Work 376-3800 ! FAX 312-3-553 J. S. DISTRICT JUDGE May 11, 1995 Dear Friends, Please pardon the mass-mail letter format. Immediate help is needed and hereby requested. I'll be brief. When the School Board adopted Dr. Hank Williams' latest budget cut recommendation (see enclosed article), it axed a position that should not have been axed. That position is the Girted \u0026amp; Talented Coordinator, currently held by Diane Rynders. Possibly this position was placed in the cut package by mistake, possibly not. 1 am researching that even as diis letter is being written. A special meeting of the Little Rock School Board will be held at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, May 17 to allow opponents of this particular positions being cut to present their case. I hope 1 can count on you to write a letter to Judge Susan Wright, with a copy to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, expressing your desire that this position not be cut. This position is one of only two G/T positions at the LRSD's administration level. That is, half tlie staff for this aspect of public education, will be eliminated. \" t The coordinator has taken the lead in LRSDs outstanding participation in Quiz Bowl, Odyssey of tho Mind, Junior Groot Boolcc, Sixth Grode Challenge, and Monitoring Programs. 1 have coached a Gibbs Magnet School Odyssey of the Mind team for the past two years, and I can tell you that Ms. Rynders put in yeomans hours and effort on that program. She was diere when odicrs were not for any potential problem. But diis effort to retain the position she holds is not about hej|^ndividually. To cut half die administrative staff of the G/T program sends the wrong message to die folks we want to try to keep in die Little Rock public school system. I have stuck with the system (kids at Forest Park, Pulaski Heights Jr. High, Central, and Gibbs) through thick and thin primarily because of programs such as G/T, which administers exceptionally positive strokes to students on a totally color-blind basis. , Please write Judge Wright a letter or post card, stating \"I oppose die elimination of the Gifted/Talented Coordinator's position at LRSD\" or words to diat effect, and send a copy to Ann Brown, the desegregation monitor. Their addresses are on the back of this letter. T /)L5O-P\u0026gt;48 ni: ccnf^ -feKeARIUmiM \u0026lt;:'****.. e rfWtk* I uo0 r'-O  Srt C 7 cc ' -/c.- ^(p/y 6tpy f. U, WESTERN ARKANSAS EDUCATION SERVICE COOPERATIVE Guy Fenter, Director RR 1 Box 104 Branch Arkansas 72928 965-2191 635-5201 Cinnf^ n RECEIVED CHAMBERS OF _ SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT MAY 1X 1995 laE Serving public schools In... Crawford County... Alma Cedarville Mountainburg Mulberry Van Buren MAY i i 1995 Office of De' May 9, 1995 .vl.-' Franklin County... Altus-Donning Charleston County Line Ozark Pleasant View The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 E, Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge WrigAt\nJohnson County.. Clarksville Lamar Oark Westside I am writing on behalf of Diane Rynders position of Assistant Coordinator of Gifted and Talented Programs for the Little Rock ScAoot District, Superintendent Aos \"cut\" It is my understanding tAat tAe Little RocA tAis position from funding for tAe fiscal year beginning in July 1995 as one of severat \"cuts unnecessary expenditures, H deemed as I find tAis Une of reasoning to be quite Logan County... Booneville Magazine Paris Scranton inappropriate and inaccurate based on my own understanding of Ms, Rynders and what she has done for the gifted and talented programs in the Little Rock District, Diane Rynders Aas u/orAed Aard to develop a fine staff of teacAers in tAe gifted and talented program wAo are knondedgeable of tAe area Scott County... Waldron and informed about the various types of assessment which can and is being done to assess students in your district in order to fairly treat aU populations represented. SAe Aas gone out of Aer way to Sebastian County... Fort Smith Greenwood Hackett Hartford Lavaca Mansfield try to find ways to appropriately identify and serve minority students who had not been previously identified prior to her tenure. She has worked to develop community interest and support in the GT programs, the student projects, and worked to interrelate higher level tAinking skills wit Ain th.c regular curriculum. SAe has worked with the GT teachers to develop a district-wide 6th grade competition open to large numbers of students held yearly in the spring. It Aas expanded the understanding of how giftedness can be shown in many ways to students, faculty, and parents alike. Migrant Service in... Conway County Crawford County Johnson County Logan County Pope County Scott County Sebastian County Yell County I am appalled tAat the Little Rock Superintendent could consider efforts such as this to be \"unnecessary expenditures\". This position is vital to the efforts being undertaken to meet the federal mandates established by the courts to equalize services to all populations, Tke position, and especially the individual in the position, does much to provide positive examples of what students are capable of doing to the community and the public at large.#w( =69W/E?' Students of aff races are seen working together cooperativeiy to solve problems in student competitions such as Odyssey of the Mind. Little Rock GT programs have been quite visible in Odyssey of the Mind, which focuses on creative endeavors of individuals working within a group to solve problems and not simply academics within a cCassroom setting. It provides exposure to new experiences utilizing drama, music, and other visual and fine arts as a part of the overalC problem solving. Children of various ages, classrooms, races, and ability levels all work together to develop solutions. Ms. Rynders has been instrumental in bringing individuals from other states who are considered experts at the national level to help in the identification of minorities, the training of teachers in observation techniques, and the coordination of ideas within the district to form an overall district plan. At the state level Ms. Rynders, as Assistant Coordinator of Gifted Programs, attends monthly meetings of all State GT Supervisors, is very active in the AGATE Conference each year and encourages her teachers to do so, is active in both regional and state level of Odyssey of the Mind Competitions, helps with district, regional, and state level quiz bowls at varying levels, encourages competitions of all sorts within the district, brings in new and innovative programs for the teachers to view and or adopt as a part of their curriculum. The area of gifted and talented services offers much which the average person on the street can see and react favorably towards. It focuses on the child who is succeeding within the education system, not as is so often the case, the one who is failing or in some kind of trouble. It sheds a positive light on the Little Rock School District and is something that should be emphasized and expanded not in any way cut. I would hope that you would see fit to reinstate Diane Rynders in the position of Assistant Coordinator of Gifted and Talented Services for the Little Rock School District for the 1995-1996 school year. inc^/ely. Carolyn P. 3/iry GT Supervisor Western Arkansas Education Service Cooperative Guy F. Fenter, Director RR 1 Box 104 - Branch, AR 72928 M  The Honorable Susan Web^^f Wright office of Desegregation and monitoring 201 E. Markham Little ^ock, AR 72201 Suite 510 iitiiilltiilll iiiiiilliiiililliiiililliitllltc : (Li^ MAY-16-95 TUE 14:48 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 04 May 12, 1995 RECEIVED MAY 1 6 1995 RECS:5'.fSD CHAMs.se '.V'liC-l-fT Office of Desegregation fsionitoring MAY 15 1995 Dr. Henry Williams LRSD Superintendent 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR. 72201 J. 3. DISTRICT JUDGE Dear Dr. Williams.- We are , - sending you distributed to --------- a copy of a letter that has been uiscrioutea parents of cr-ifi-oH 1 ----neen Little Rock SchoTl District wa Moomi in the time for you in identifyi specific difficult Sincerely believe, however  J or budget cuts. We Talented Coordinator position will ad-ita the Gifted and because the result will be the ai,cxSS\u0026amp;M' and successful programs. services children in the Gifted/Taiant-o/i 1955. As advocates for you and the board of directors LRSD, we hope that eliminate the position of Gifted end rSSSd JJcrdTnaTS\"\"' Sincerely, Barbara Mills Elementary A.G.A.T. . Parent Elizabeth Dowell CC: Secondary A.G.A.T.E. Parent Honorable Susan Webber Anne Brown - ODM Wright LRSD Board of Directors LRSD Administrators Dr, Patty Kohler, Division of Magnet Review Committee Exceptional Children Arkansas Department of Education Director   Superintendent of NLRSD ~ Superintendent of PCSSD John Walker Gene WilhoitOfffce of Desegregation Monitoring Unjtsd 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 May 12, 1995 Ms. Judy Lively, Supervisor, Gifted Education Dawson Education Co-Op 711 Clinton, Suite 201 Arkadelphia, AR 71923 Dear Ms. Lively: Judge Susan Webber Wright has asked me to respond to your letter in which you express concern about the elimination of the gifted and talented coordinators position in the Little Rock School District. Although she is sensitive to the concerns that community members have about the desegregation process and related issues, as a matter of policy. Judge Wright does not correspond directly with citizens. Instead, she relies upon us in her Office of Desegregation Monitoring to discuss school matters with individuals and organizations. As an Associate Monitor on the staff, one of my responsibilities is to monitor gifted and talented education in the three Pulaski County School districts. I have been contacted by several citizens from across the state expressing concern, alarm, and dismay at the proposal by the superintendent of the Little Rock School District to eliminate the position of Coordinator of Gifted and Talented education. Our involvement with the LRSD is limited to monitoring compliance with provisions in their desegregation plan, and gifted education is a component of the districts plan. The LRSD is required to obtain court approval for any action that might have an adverse impact on implementing their plan. The court has not given the district approval to make the proposed change, and I will recommend against approval. Although I cannot speak for Judge Wright, I believe she will give strong consideration to my recommendation. I suggest that you forward a copy of your letter to the Board of Education. It is my understanding that a parent group has petitioned for a special board meeting to address the elimination of the coordinators position. If you are interested in attending the meeting, you may call the districts central office at (501) 324-2000 or me at (501) 376-6200, for the date and time of the school board meeting. lincerely, T  irgie L. Powell Associate Monitor -MAY- -95 TUE 15:27 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 02 i7 R. 0. SAUNDERS DIRECTOR i DAWSON a EDUCATION ' I', 711 CLINTON, SUITE 201 ARKADELPHIA, AR 71923 501/246-3077 I May 5, 1995 Honorable Susan Webber Wri^t Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 E. Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Wright I am r-onecreed about the Little Rock School District cutting the position of Gifted and Talented Coordinator. I feel that this program would suffer without the scrrices that Ms. Diane Ryndei's provides. Site is involved with OifTerentiated curriculum development for gifted students, monitoring the pregrams in the elementary schools for the district to liLsure compliance, and the identification of gifted students in the district She has l?ecn instrumental in giving disadvantaged and minority students an equal opportunity in the screening and identification processes provided by the mandate set forth by the state. For many years, Ms. Rynders has been involved as a state leader in the Odyssey of the Mind coiniietition. She held the position of State Director for a great number of those years. Under her guidance and leadership, Arkansas has been well represented at the annual OM Wiirld Hnals. Without her expertise, I feel this program will sufter-and iiiiimately tile studeuis of uic Liiiie Rock Schoo! Disirici wiii nut iiuve the oppiirtunsiies afforded to them through her knowledge of the competition rules and regulations. Plca.sc consider tlte reinstatement of tliis position for the students of the Little Rock School Distiict They deserve the very best we can give them, and I think Ms. Rynders skills are an asset for tbe district Thank you for your consideration. I Sincerely, Judy Lively Supendsor of Gifted Education I: 1995 s. 0 9 \u0026lt;Sc^oo[i. eSeWui^ tHi ^^itclxui Office of Desegregation Monitoring Unhed States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 (SOI) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 May 12, 1995 Ms. Kay Kyle Luter, Supervisor of Gifted Education Crowleys Ridge Education Service Cooperative P. O. Box 377 Harrisburg, AR 72432 Dear Ms. Luter: Judge Susan Webber Wright has asked me to respond to your letter in which you express concern about the elimination of the gifted and talented coordinators position in the Little Rock School District. Although she is sensitive to the concerns that community members have about the desegregation process and related issues, as a matter of policy. Judge Wright does not correspond directly with citizens. Instead, she relies upon us in her Office of Desegregation Monitoring to discuss school matters with individuals and organizations. As an Associate Monitor on the staff, one of my responsibilities is to monitor gifted and talented education in the three Pulaski County School districts. I have been contacted by several citizens from across the state expressing concern, alarm, and dismay at the proposal by the superintendent of the Little Rock School District to eliminate the position of Coordinator of Gifted and Talented education. Our involvement with the LRSD is limited to monitoring compliance wdth provisions in their desegregation plan, and gifted education is a component of the districts plan. The LRSD is required to obtain court approval for any action that might have an adverse impact on implementing their plan. The court has not given the district approval to make the proposed change, and I will recommend against approval. Although I cannot speak for Judge Wright, I believe she will give strong consideration to my recommendation. I suggest that you forward a copy of your letter to the Board of Education. It is ray understanding that a parent group has petitioned for a special board meeting to address the elimination of the coordinators position. If you are interested in attending the meeting, you may call the districts central office at (501) 324-2000 or me at (501) 376-6200, for the date and time of the school board meeting. Sincerely, Margie L. Powell argie Associate Monitor-MAY--9-95 TUE 15:30 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P,08 *1 A P R I S BV R G CROWLEYS RIDGE EDUCATION SERVICE COOPERATIVE P.O. Box 377 Harrisburg, Arkansas 72432 (501) 578-5426 Serving Public Schools In\nCraighead County Bay-Brown Brookland Buffalo-Island JonesOoro Nettleton Riverside Valley View Westside Crittenden County Crawfordsville Earle Marion Turrell Cross County Cross County Parkin Wynne Jackson County Newport Mississippi County Armorel aiytheviile Gosnell Manila Osceola So. Miss, County Poinsett County East Poinsetl County Harrisburg Marked Tree Trumann Weiner May 4, 1995 R J! \u0026gt; MAT 10 i?95 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright, Office of O'S-\nf:n^ I am an associate and colleague of Diane Rynders, who is currently one of the two Gifted and Talented Coordinators for the Little Rock School District. The position held by Diane was cut in the latest round of cuts for the Little Rock School District. It seems to me that as soon as something positive gets a start in Little Rock School District, here comes something to tear it apart. Even if Diane wasn't doing a wonderful job in the position it would still need to be there. The size of Little Rock School District warrants at least two people to monitor programs and provide services. The fact that Diane does a fantastic job makes it more crucial that the position remain. She is the organizing force behind many provisions enjoyed by Little Rock students. Some of the parts of her job, besides premonitoring, staff d^elopment and dissemination of information are: Odyssey of the Mind, Quiz Bowl and Sixth Grade Challenge. I think many of the opportunities provided by the Gifted and Talented Program would fail by the wayside with the elimination of the position. This whole thing spills over into the desegregation issue, because all students will he affected within the elementary gifted program. I know you are thinking about this issue. Please know that the Little Rock School District needs its elementary gifted and talented position and it needs Diane Rynders. RSCEP/SD CHA\n.ERS OF SUSAN WRIGHT MAY 0 9 1395 Sincerely, Kay Kyle Luter, Supervisor Gifted and Talented Education U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE 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 May 12, 1995 Mr. Kirby Shofner 204 N. Ash Little Rock, AR 72205 Dear Mr. Shofner: Judge Susan Webber Wright has asked me to respond to your letter in which you express concern about the elimination of the gifted and talented coordinators position in the Little Rock School District. Although she is sensitive to the concerns that community members have about the desegregation process and related issues, as a matter of policy. Judge Wright does not correspond directly with citizens. Instead, she relies upon us in her Office of Desegregation Monitoring to discuss school matters with individuals and organizations. As an Associate Monitor on the staff, one of my responsibilities is to monitor gifted and talented education in the three Pulaski County School districts. I have been contacted by several citizens from across the state expressing concern, alarm, and dismay at the proposal by the superintendent of the Little Rock School District to eliminate the position of Coordinator of Gifted and Talented education. Our involvement with the LRSD is limited to monitoring compliance with provisions in their desegregation plan, and gifted education is a component of the districts plan. The LRSD is required to obtain court approval for any action that might have an adverse impact on implementing their plan. The court has not given the district approval to make the proposed change, and I will recommend against approval. Although I cannot speak for Judge Wright, 1 believe she will give strong consideration to my recommendation. I suggest that you forward a copy of your letter to the Board of Education. It is my understanding that a parent group has petitioned for a special board meeting to address the elimination of the coordinators position. If you are interested in attending the meeting, you may call the districts central office at (501) 324-2000 or me at (501) 376-6200, for the date and time of the school board meeting. Sincerely, 1 W- Powell Associate Monitor W- 9-95 TUE 15:29 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 06 May 7, 1995 Dear Judge Wright, I am sure that you really don't want to receive another letter regarding the budget cuts proposed by Dr. Williams for the Little Rock School District, but I felt compelled to write to let you know how I feel about the elimination of the Gifted and Talented coordinator position. In the ten years I have been teaching at Central 1 have seen many changes occur. Many good and certainly many bad. One of the most positive things that has occured is the appointment of Diane Rynders to the GT Coordinator position. Before her arrival, the GT office was at best in turmoil. I had many dealings with the people in that office at that time and it was my impression that there was absolutely no leadership and continunity occuring. Since Diane arrived things have been well organized and directed. I always know who to contact and what is expected of teachers in the district who work with gifted students. One of the things that I most look forward to during the school is the few hours a week I get to work with my Odyssey of the Mind team. These students are truly gifted. You would be amazed at what these young people can do. There is nothing that they can't accomplish if they put their minds to it. It is refreshing to see students at this advanced level at such a young age. The few hours a day that I work with these students is time where I know I am not going to have to deal with the extraneous non-teaching chores that occur all day long in my regular classes. During my regular teaching day most of my time is spent with discipline and reprimands which unfortunately turn what should be a positive teaching atmosphere into an aggravation. I look forward to the time 1 spend with my OM team. It is always fun and positive, the highlight of many of my working days I can't think of what will happen if the GT office loses its coordinator, much less losing Mrs. Rynders. There has to be other ways to reduced the deficit at the district. The administration is top heavy in other directions if cuts need to be made. Sacrifices have to be made by all, but 1 honestly feel that this is a terrible mistake and very little thought went in to making this descision. One thing for sure. Many students will not attend Little Rock Schools if the Gifted Programs are not fully functioning. One of the main attractions is rhe many GT classes and programs available to students who need them and parents who want their children in them. The elimination of this position needs serious reconsideration on everyone's part. I really appreciate your time. I hope things will work out where the GT Cooridinator's position can remain intact. Please feel free to contact me if you need any additional input. Sincerely ____ Kirby Shoraer Central High School W/IV 0 91995 Us. ^l^TFiiCTOffice 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) 371-01OO May 12, 1995 Mr. John W. Calaway, Supervisor of Gifted Education Northcentral Arkansas Education Service Center P.O. Box 739 Melbourne, AR 72556 f Dear Mr. Calaway: to respond to your letter in which you express and talented coordinators position in the Little the concerns that community members Judge Susan Webber Wright has asked me to concern about the elimination of the gifted \u0026lt; Rock School District. Although she is sensitive to have about the desegregation process and related issues, as a matter of policy, Judge Wright have about tne aesegrcgauvu ...--------------- h^r Dffirp of does not correspond directly with citizens. \u0026gt;\"s\u0026lt;eh\u0026lt;), she 1. up ns m he Office Desegregation Monitoring to discuss school matters with individuals and organizations. As an Associate Monitor on talented education in the three the staff, one of my responsibilities is to monitor gifted and Pulaski County School districts. I have been contacted by S CU^ fro the state expressing concern, marnt, and dismay at the propos^ by the superintendent of the Little Rock Coordinator of Gifted and Talented education. -------  .. School District to eliminate the position ot Our involvement with the LRSD is limited to monitoring compliance with provisions in them desegregation plan, and gifted education is a is required to obtain court approval for any implementing their plan. The court has not given component of the districts plan. The LRSD action that might have an adverse impact on the district approval to make the proposed change, and I will recommend against approval. Although I cannot speak for Judge Wright, I believe she will give strong consideration to my recommendation. the Board of Education. It is my I suggest that you forward a copy of your letter to understanding that a parent group has petitioned for a special board meeting toaddress the eh^Saation o? the coJrdlnaroVs posinou. If you are in.ercs.ed in attending, .he ntcctlng.^you may can the districts central office at (501) 324-2000 or me at (501) 376-6200, for the date and time of the school board meeting. Sincerely, I ar! L. Powell ssociate MonitorI I I MAY- 9-95 TUE 15:28 1 A I 5 i S c I.. V c .lAltEU MdXLEY, Dt/crMf Baxtkr Mountain home Norfork FULTON Mammoth Spring SALEM Viola Independence Batesville CORD-CIIARLOTTB CUSHMAN Midland Newark Southside SULPHUR Hock IZARD Calico rock Izard County Consolidated Melbourne MT. ILEASANT SHARP EVENING SHADE Highland STONE MOUNTAIN VIEW Rural special TIMBO SUSAN W WRIGHT NAESC Telephone .=iOl-3efi.79i).5 May 5, 1995 FAX NO. 5013246576 fP?04 MAY 1 0 1995 Northcentral Actons as ess Education Service Center P. 0. Box 739  Melbourne, Arknnsns 725.56 Honorable Susan Webber Wright Office of Desegregation \u0026amp; Monitoring 201 E. Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Honorable Susan Webber Wright: J RGCRIVu-q SUSAN V/r-m.-,.-\n, MAY 0 9 1395 U. s. DISTRICT judge Iam writing you in response to a news report that the Little Rock School District is proposing to eliminate the position of Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Coordinator. While I can understand the need for the District to make budget reductions, I am truly surprised that this position would be one targeted for elimination. As a State G/T Supervisor, I work with twenty schools with varying numbers of students. I know the plight of the G/T coordinators in these schools and not one of them has anywhere near the size of program that Mrs. Rynders has with which to work. With a program the size of Little Rock School District's, approximately 4,000 students, confidently say that their G/T program is already understaffed. A curricular program designed to enhance the learning of high ability learners, regardless of race, creed, or color, should be the last program one would choose to negatively effect by reducing staff. I can sex, Iirs. Rynders has done an excellent job of designing student identification procedures that eliminate biases and allow gifted minority students to be considered equally for the G/T program. Without proper administrative overview, shortcuts will be taken, procedures will be dropped, and many gifted students will never be found. I want to emphasize that the administrative overview, in order to be effective, must come from someone with the training and knowledge concerning testing and identification procedures of all G/T students. I must admit that I cant comprehend why X can't why, at a time when Little Rock is spending millions of dollars to encourageMAY- 9-95 TUE 15:29 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 05 students to remain in their district, one would want to adversely effect the quality of a program seen as a positive and attracting element of the district. I would also like to add that Mrs. Rynders has been very active, due to her position, in statewide associations. While operating within these circles she has been able to act as a strong advocate on behalf of the students from her district. This year a minority student from the LRSD is attending my AEGIS program. It was beneficial for the student that he was coming from Diane's program. She is a strong advocate for her students, but this type of activity will never show up on any report to the Superintendent or the Court. In closing, I urge you to please consider the damage that will be done to the G/T progreun, but more importantly to all G/T students, should this position be eliminated. I read in a report that 90% of every federal dollar, for education, is spent on remedial programs and only .1% is spent for high ability learners. I hope you take a stand against this trend. Respectfully yours, John W. Calaway Supervisor of Gifted Education 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 May 12, 1995 Mr. Davis Hendricks 1016 East H Avenue North Little Rock, AR 72116 Dear Mr. Hendricks: Judge Susan Webber Wright has asked me to respond to your letter in which you express concern about the elimination of the gifted and talented coordinators position in the Little Rock School District. Although she is sensitive to the concerns that community members have about the desegregation process and related issues, as a matter of policy. Judge Wright does not correspond directly with citizens. Instead, she relies upon us in her Office of Desegregation Monitoring to discuss school matters with individuals and organizations. As an Associate Monitor on the staff, one of my responsibilities is to monitor gifted and talented education in the three Pulaski County School districts. I have been contacted by several citizens from across the state expressing concern, alarm, and dismay at the proposal by the superintendent of the Little Rock School District to eliminate the position of Coordinator of Gifted and Talented education. Our involvement with the LRSD is limited to monitoring compliance with provisions in their desegregation plan, and gifted education is a component of the districts plan. The LRSD is required to obtain court approval for any action that might have an adverse impact on implementing their plan. The court has not given the district approval to make the proposed change, and I will recommend against approval. Although I cannot speak for Judge Wright, I believe she will give strong consideration to my recommendation. I suggest that you forward a copy of your letter to the Board of Education. It is my understanding that a parent group has petitioned for a special board meeting to address the elimination of the coordinators position. If you are interested in attending the meeting, you may call the districts central office at (501) 324-2000 or me at (501) 376-6200, for the date and time of the school board meeting. Sincerely, Ma/gie L. Powell Associate Monitor MAY- .9-95 TUE 15:27 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 03 t May 4,1995 MAY 1 0 Ti95 The Honorable Susaii Weber Wright Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 201E. Markham Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Office of Dessgreg\u0026amp;iic\n... ?g Dear Judge Wright, I am writing to urge you to disallow the t\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":"tmll_hpcrc_40694940","title":"Handicap protection for AIDS victims in Washington, D.C.","collection_id":"tmll_hpcrc","collection_title":"Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":["United States Commission on Civil Rights. District of Columbia Advisory Committee"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, District of Columbia, Washington, 38.89511, -77.03637"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1989"],"dcterms_description":["A digital version of the report published by the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["AIDS (Disease)--Patients--Legal status, laws, etc.--Washington (D.C.)--Congresses","Discrimination in medical care--Washington (D.C.)--Congresses","People with disabilities--Legal status, laws, etc.--United States--Congresses","Public health laws--Washington (D.C.)--Congresses"],"dcterms_title":["Handicap protection for AIDS victims in Washington, D.C."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Thurgood Marshall Law Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":["http://www2.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/usccr/documents/cr12ai2z.pdf"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://crdl.usg.edu/id:tmll_hpcrc_40694940"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports","records"],"dcterms_extent":["60 p. ; 28 cm."],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"gsu_ajc_7639","title":"IAM members and Jesse Jackson picketing against Eastern Airlines during a strike, Atlanta, Georgia, 1989.","collection_id":"gsu_ajc","collection_title":"Atlanta Journal-Constitution Photographs","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":["Atlanta Journal-Constitution"],"dc_date":["1989"],"dcterms_description":["no information"],"dc_format":["image/jp2"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Atlanta Journal-Constitution Photographic Archive"],"dcterms_subject":["Strikes and lockouts--Airlines","Eastern Air Lines, Inc., Strike (1989-1991)","Civil rights workers","Eastern Air Lines","International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers"],"dcterms_title":["IAM members and Jesse Jackson picketing against Eastern Airlines during a strike, Atlanta, Georgia, 1989."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Georgia State University. Special Collections"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://digitalcollections.library.gsu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/ajc/id/7639"],"dcterms_temporal":["1980/1989"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Cite as: AJCP309-016h, Atlanta Journal-Constitution Photographic Archives. Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library."],"dlg_local_right":["This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. In addition, no permission is required from the rights-holder(s) for educational uses. For other uses, you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s)."],"dcterms_medium":["photographic prints"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Jackson, Jesse, 1941-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":840,"next_page":841,"prev_page":839,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":10068,"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}}]}}