Free school system.
“Intelligence and virtue being the safeguards of liberty and the bulwark of a free and good government, the State shall ever maintain a general, suitable and efficient system of free public schools and shall adopt all suitable means to secure to the people the advantages and opportunities of education.”
Arkansas Constitution, Article 14, Section 1
Supervision of schools.
“The supervision of public schools, and the execution of the laws regulating the same, shall be vested in and confided to, such officers as may be provided for by the General Assembly.”
Arkansas Constitution, Article 14, Section 4
In 2006, after the Arkansas Supreme Court decision in Lake View School District No. 25 v. Huckabee in 2005, the Eighty-fifth General Assembly passed acts upon the recommendation of the House and Senate Interim Committees on Education resulting in a system of education that is “adequate and equitable.”
On January 28, 2015, the State Board of Education exercised its Constitutional authority granted by the General Assembly and voted to take over the Little Rock School District and dismiss its local elected board. At the time, one school in Academic Distress (three-year average of less than 49.5% of students proficient) could trigger state takeover. Little Rock had six schools in Academic Distress, including three of its five high schools.
Three full school years later (three years and ten months total), how has the state performed in making the district “adequate and equitable?”
Equity
In the Saturday, September 23, 2017 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Rita Sklar of the Arkansas ACLU, repeated what has become a constant talking point of those opposed to both charter schools and the State’s intervention in the Little Rock School District.
“Here in Little Rock, the process of re-segregating our classrooms has accelerated since the state takeover of the Little Rock School District in 2015, and new state-initiated and authorized charter schools are being created at a breakneck pace and with a fervor that is obscene.”
And yet, no evidence is ever provided regarding the district’s “re-segregation” since State control nor the charters’ alleged role as accomplices. In fact, the district’s decades-long, locally-controlled history of “re-segregation”- via gerrymandered, non-contiguous attendance zones, preferential magnet admissions, and bussing of Hispanic high school students – is conveniently ignored.
The reason no evidence is ever provided is because none exists. In fact, the truth is just the opposite of the status quo’s re-segregation fabrication.
Here are demographic data for the district since the advent of the first charter school in 2004.
- District enrollment has dropped 5,363 students (-12%) over the past 15 years
- African-American enrollment has dropped 3,490 students (-21%) over the past 15 years (65% of total)
- White enrollment has dropped 1,873 students (-31%) over the past 15 years (35% of total)
- African-American and White enrollment has essentially declined 1 percentage point a year for the past fifteen years for an overall decline of 24%
- Hispanic enrollment has grown 2,053 students (+167%) in the same period
- As a percentage of enrollment, Hispanic enrollment has grown from 5% to 15% over the past 15 years
- For the first time in fifteen years, Hispanic enrollment dropped (-71) between 2017-18 and 2018-19
- African-American enrollment is at its lowest number (13,248) and percentage (61%) on modern record
- White enrollment is at its highest number (4,095) in five years and highest percentage (19%) in six years
- The gap between African-American and White students is lowest in number (9,153) on modern record and lowest percentage (76%/24%) in nine years
| 2 or More Races | Asian | Black | Hispanic | Native American/ Alaskan | Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander | White | Total | Total Black/White Enrollment | Black/White Enrollment Gap | |
| 2004-05* | NA | 430 | 16,738 (69%) | 1,226 (5%) | 62 | NA | 5,968 (24%) | 24,424 | 22,706 (93%) | 10,770 (74%/26%) |
| 2005-06 | NA | 399 | 17,173 (68%) | 1,343 (5%) | 69 | NA | 6,111 (24%) | 25,095 | 23,284 (93%) | 11,062 (74%/26%) |
| 2006-07 | NA | 412 | 17,432 (68%) | 1,553 (7%) | 76 | NA | 6,027 (24%) | 25,550 | 23,459 (92%) | 11,405 (74%/26%) |
| 2007-08 | NA | 436 | 17,715 (69%) | 1,733 (7%) | 81 | NA | 5,773 (22%) | 25,738 | 23,488 (91%) | 11,942 (75%/25%) |
| 2008-09** | NA | 432 | 16,936 (69%) | 1,865 (8%) | 73 | NA | 5,354 (22%) | 24,660 | 22,290 (90%) | 11,582 (76%/24%) |
| 2009-10 | NA | 450 | 16,574 (68%) | 1,927 (8%) | 76 | NA | 5,363 (22%) | 24,380 | 21,937 (90%) | 11,211 (76%/24%) |
| 2010-11 | 126 | 509 | 16,245 (67%) | 2,174 (9%) | 83 | 2 | 5,087 (21%) | 24,226 | 21,332 (88%) | 11,158 (76%/24%) |
| 2011-12 | 177 | 534 | 16,114 (67%) | 2,322 (10%) | 75 | 8 | 4,819 (20%) | 24,049 | 20,933 (87%) | 11,295 (77%/23%) |
| 2012-13 | 199 | 523 | 15,708 (67%) | 2,540 (11%) | 69 | 6 | 4,549 (19%) | 23,594 | 20,257 (86%) | 11,159 (78%/22%) |
| 2013-14 | 227 | 579 | 15,689 (66%) | 2,728 (12%) | 64 | 9 | 4,380 (19%) | 23,676 | 20,069 (85%) | 11,309 (78%/22%) |
| 2014-15 | 271 | 557 | 15,371 (66%) | 2,925 (13%) | 65 | 10 | 4,164 (18%) | 23,363 | 19,535 (84%) | 11,207 (79%/21%) |
| 2015-16*** | 272 | 567 | 15,070 (65%) | 3,124 (13%) | 55 | 11 | 4,065 (18%) | 23,164 | 19,135 (83%) | 11,005 (79%/21%) |
| 2016-17 | 285 | 563 | 14,603 (64%) | 3,183 (14%) | 57 | 14 | 4,054 (18%) | 22,759 | 18,657 (82%) | 10,549 (78.3%/21.7%) |
| 2017-18 | 318 | 595 | 14,040 (63%) | 3,350 (15%) | 54 | 10 | 3,971 (18%) | 22,338 | 18,011 (81%) | 10,069 (78%/22%) |
| 2018-19 | 241 (1%) | 671 (3%) | 13,248 (61%) | 3,279 (15%) | 53 (0%) | 8 (0%) | 4,095 (19%) | 21,595 | 17,343 (80%) | 9,153 (76%/24%) |
| TOTAL LOSS/GAIN | +115 (+91%) | +241 (+56%) | -3,490 (-21%) | +2,053 (+167%) | -9 (-15%) | 12 (+600%) | -1,873 (-31%) | -2,829 (-12%) | -5,363 (-24%) | -1,617 (-15%) |
| BEFORE STATE CONTROL LOSS/GAIN | +271 | +127 (+30%) | -1,367 (-8%) | +1,699 (+139%) | +3 (+1%) | NA | -1,804 (-30%) | -1,061 (-4%) | -3,171 (-14%) | +437 (+5%/-5%) |
| STATE CONTROL LOSS/GAIN | +30 (+11%) | +114 (+20%) | -2,123 (-14%) | +354 (+12%) | -8 (-12%) | -2 (-20%) | -69 (-2%) | -1,768 (-8% | -2,192 (-11%) | -2,054 (-18%) |
* First Year of Charters
** First Year of African-American Majority Board
*** First Year of State Takeover
Meanwhile, at the charters and neighboring school district…
| District/School | 2 or More Races | Asian | Black | Hispanic | Native American/ Alaskan | Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander | White | Total |
| LRSD | 241 (1%) | 671 (3%) | 13,248 (61%) | 3,279 (15%) | 53 (0.2%) | 8 (0%) | 4,095 (19%) | 21,595 |
| PCSSD (South of River) | 111 (3%) | 178 (4%) | 1,576 (38%) | 520 (12%) | 16 (0%) | 1 (0%) | 1,773 (42%) | 4,175 |
| All Little Rock Charters* | 229 (4%) | 206 (3%) | 3,389 (56%) | 1,019 (17%) | 15 (0%) | 2 (0%) | 1,457 (19%) | 6,001 |
| Covenant Keepers | 0 | 0 | 32 (28%) | 82 (72%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 114 |
| eStem | 160 (5%) | 53 (2%) | 1,783 (58%) | 258 (8%) | 7 (0%) | 2 (0%) | 1,129 (20%) | 3,070 |
| Exalt | 7 (2%) | 0 | 150 (30%) | 242 (60%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 406 |
| LISA Academy | 45 (3%) | 142 (10%) | 587 (43%) | 371 (27%) | 6 (0%) | 0 | 223 (16%) | 1,374 |
| Little Rock Prep | 2 (0%) | 0 | 319 (88%) | 35 (10%) | 0 | 0 | 5 (1%) | 361 |
| Premier | 0 | 0 | 104 (90%) | 5 (4%) | 0 | 0 | 7 (6%) | 116 |
| Quest | 7 (4%) | 11 (7%) | 50 (31%) | 12 (7%) | 2 (1%) | 0 | 81 (50%) | 163 |
| ScholarMade | 7 (2.5%) | 0 | 253 (93%) | 7 (2.5%) | 0 | 0 | 5 (2%) | 272 |
| SIA Tech | 1 (1%) | 0 | 111 (89%) | 7 (6%) | 0 | 0 | 6 (5%) | 125 |
* Friendship Public Charter School will open in 2019 at 3615 West 25th Street.
Here are the facts:
- Open-enrollment public charter school enrollment in Little Rock is 6,001
- 3,389 (56%) African-American
- 1,134 (19%) White – Same percentage as the Little Rock School District
- African-Americans choose Little Rock charter schools at a rate three times that of Whites
- There are over twice as many African-Americans in Little Rock charters schools than there are in Little Rock PCSSD schools (1,576)
Though dramatic improvement has occurred during the State’s watch, true equity will not come to the Little Rock School District until:
- Central’s sprawling, preferentially gerrymandered, non-contiguous attendance zone is abolished
- Attendance zones only applied to neighborhood elementary schools
- All middle and high school attendance zones replaced with feeder schools (e.g. Fulbright, Roberts, Terry feeding Pinnacle View Middle School)
- Students no longer bussed, Balkanized based solely on culture
- Preferential and audition-based magnet, academy admissions for intra-district schools of choice replaced by open-enrollment, blind lotteries
- Schools are opened, closed, reconstituted based solely on current, projected demand
It’s now solely up to the State to correct what decades of local control created and perpetuated.
Adequacy
Adequacy (i.e. academic performance, growth) is a different story.
In the school year following the State’s intervention in Little Rock, the State changed its summative assessment from PARCC to ACT Aspire (Grades 3-10) and ACT (Grade 11). Three years later, we now have two years of growth, performance data.
ACT Aspire (Grades 3 – 10) – Rounded Percentage of Students Meeting/Exceeding Readiness
* Original Six Academic Distress Schools (Three-year Average of Less than 49.5% of Students Proficient)
Bold indicates decline in all subjects in one year or over two
| 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 1-Year Growth | 2017-18 | 1-Year Growth | 2-Year Growth | |
| State Math | 43% | 47% | +4 | 47% | 0 | +4 |
| State English | 68% | 70% | +2 | 70% | 0 | +2 |
| State Reading | 39% | 41% | +2 | 41% | 0 | +2 |
| State Science | 38% | 40% | +2 | 40% | 0 | +2 |
| LRSD Math | 33% | 37% | +4 | 36% | -1 | +3 |
| LRSD English | 57% | 59% | +2 | 59% | 0 | +2 |
| LRSD Reading | 30% | 32% | +2 | 32% | 0 | +2 |
| LRSD Science | 23% | 29% | +6 | 29% | 0 | +6 |
| Bale Math | 28% | 23% | -5 | 27% | +4 | -1 |
| Bale English | 45% | 41% | -4 | 47% | +6 | +2 |
| Bale Reading | 15% | 12% | -3 | 16% | +3 | +1 |
| Bale Science | 19% | 10% | -5 | 16% | +5 | +1 |
| Bale Cumulative | -17 | +19 | +2 | |||
| *Baseline Math | 32% | 40% | +8 | 25% | -15 | -7 |
| *Baseline English | 41% | 50% | +9 | 44% | -6 | +3 |
| *Baseline Reading | 15% | 16% | +1 | 12% | -4 | -3 |
| *Baseline Science | 14% | 19% | +3 | 13% | -5 | -2 |
| *Baseline Cumulative | +21 | -30 | -9 | |||
| Booker Math | 39% | 43% | +4 | 43% | 0 | +4 |
| Booker English | 63% | 62% | -1 | 62% | 0 | -1 |
| Booker Reading | 28% | 25% | -3 | 30% | +6 | +3 |
| Booker Science | 25% | 30% | +2 | 32% | +1 | +4 |
| Booker Cumulative | +2 | +7 | +9 | |||
| Brady Math | 20% | 27% | +6 | 29% | +2 | +9 |
| Brady English | 54% | 51% | -3 | 59% | +8 | +5 |
| Brady Reading | 12% | 18% | +6 | 21% | +3 | +9 |
| Brady Science | 10% | 16% | +4 | 19% | +2 | +6 |
| Brady Cumulative | +13 | +16 | +29 | |||
| Carver Math | 46% | 50% | +4 | 55% | +5 | +8 |
| Carver English | 58% | 65% | +7 | 74% | +9 | +16 |
| Carver Reading | 31% | 34% | +2 | 40% | +6 | +9 |
| Carver Science | 34% | 35% | +4 | 39% | +4 | +8 |
| Carver Cumulative | +17 | +25 | +41 | |||
| Chicot Math | NA | 29% | NA | 27% | -2 | NA |
| Chicot English | NA | 46% | NA | 46% | 0 | NA |
| Chicot Reading | NA | 18% | NA | 18% | 0 | NA |
| Chicot Science | NA | 16% | NA | 13% | -3 | NA |
| Chicot Cumulative | NA | -5 | NA | |||
| Dodd Math | 28% | 36% | +8 | 33% | -3 | +5 |
| Dodd English | 58% | 55% | -3 | 55% | +1 | -3 |
| Dodd Reading | 13% | 20% | +7 | 22% | +3 | +10 |
| Dodd Science | 20% | 20% | 0 | 22% | +1 | +1 |
| Dodd Cumulative | +12 | +1 | +13 | |||
| Forest Park Math | 87% | 82% | -5 | 78% | -4 | -9 |
| Forest Park English | 91% | 92% | +1 | 92% | 0 | +2 |
| Forest Park Reading | 67% | 68% | 0 | 66% | -2 | -1 |
| Forest Park Science | 72% | 67% | -9 | 72% | +5 | -4 |
| Forest Park Cumulative | -3 | 0 | -4 | |||
| Fulbright Math | 60% | 51% | -9 | 51% | -1 | -9 |
| Fulbright English | 71% | 72% | +1 | 75% | +3 | +5 |
| Fulbright Reading | 39% | 40% | +1 | 47% | +6 | +1 |
| Fulbright Science | 44% | 39% | -5 | 41% | +1 | +1 |
| Fulbright Cumulative | -12 | +10 | +4 | |||
| Gibbs Math | 69% | 65% | -4 | 61% | -4 | -7 |
| Gibbs English | 85% | 88% | +3 | 82% | -6 | -3 |
| Gibbs Reading | 49% | 53% | +5 | 45% | -8 | -4 |
| Gibbs Science | 45% | 50% | +5 | 46% | -4 | +1 |
| Gibbs Cumulative | +9 | -23 | -13 | |||
| Jefferson Math | 63% | 72% | +9 | 80% | +8 | +17 |
| Jefferson English | 83% | 87% | +4 | 88% | 0 | +4 |
| Jefferson Reading | 45% | 62% | +17 | 65% | +3 | +20 |
| Jefferson Science | 52% | 68% | +16 | 67% | -1 | +15 |
| Jefferson Cumulative | +46 | +10 | +57 | |||
| King Math | 38% | 39% | 0 | 31% | -8 | -8 |
| King English | 53% | 53% | 0 | 53% | +1 | 0 |
| King Reading | 23% | 24% | +1 | 24% | 0 | +1 |
| King Science | 18% | 22% | +3 | 20% | -1 | +2 |
| King Cumulative | +4 | -9 | -3 | |||
| Mabelvale Math | 26% | 34% | +8 | 29% | -5 | +3 |
| Mabelvale English | 50% | 53% | +3 | 49% | -4 | -1 |
| Mabelvale Reading | 13% | 19% | +6 | 18% | -2 | +4 |
| Mabelvale Science | 13% | 18% | +5 | 14% | -4 | +1 |
| Mabelvale Cumulative | +22 | -15 | +7 | |||
| McDermott Math | 34% | 42% | +8 | 28% | -13 | -5 |
| McDermott English | 64% | 62% | -3 | 55% | -7 | -10 |
| McDermott Reading | 25% | 23% | -2 | 22% | -1 | -3 |
| McDermott Science | 21% | 20% | -1 | 23% | +2 | +2 |
| McDermott Cumulative | +2 | -19 | -16 | |||
| Meadowcliff Math | 27% | 32% | +6 | 29% | -3 | +3 |
| Meadowcliff English | 52% | 47% | -5 | 50% | +3 | -2 |
| Meadowcliff Reading | 12% | 17% | +5 | 24% | +7 | +12 |
| Meadowcliff Science | 19% | 16% | -3 | 21% | +5 | -2 |
| Meadowcliff Cumulative | +3 | +12 | +17 | |||
| Otter Creek Math | 39% | 43% | +4 | 38% | -5 | -1 |
| Otter Creek English | 61% | 65% | +4 | 59% | -6 | -1 |
| Otter Creek Reading | 29% | 27% | -2 | 26% | -1 | -2 |
| Otter Creek Science | 26% | 28% | +2 | 24% | -4 | -2 |
| Otter Creek Cumulative | +8 | -15 | -8 | |||
| Pulaski Heights Math | 53% | 66% | +14 | 57% | -9 | +4 |
| Pulaski Heights English | 72% | 78% | +5 | 75% | -3 | +2 |
| Pulaski Heights Reading | 50% | 52% | +2 | 54% | +2 | +3 |
| Pulaski Heights Science | 50% | 57% | +7 | 54% | -2 | +4 |
| Pulaski Heights Cumulative | +28 | -13 | +14 | |||
| Roberts Math | 80% | 83% | +3 | 82% | 0 | +2 |
| Roberts English | 86% | 90% | +4 | 89% | -1 | +3 |
| Roberts Reading | 68% | 69% | +1 | 68% | 0 | 0 |
| Roberts Science | 73% | 70% | -3 | 67% | -4 | -6 |
| Roberts Cumulative | -5 | -5 | -1 | |||
| Rockefeller Math | 25% | 31% | +5 | 32% | +1 | +7 |
| Rockefeller English | 49% | 53% | +3 | 66% | +13 | +16 |
| Rockefeller Reading | 19% | 21% | +3 | 22% | +1 | +4 |
| Rockefeller Science | 21% | 22% | +1 | 22% | 0 | +2 |
| Rockefeller Cumulative | +12 | +16 | +28 | |||
| Romine Math | 31% | 27% | -5 | 21% | -5 | -10 |
| Romine English | 48% | 45% | -3 | 43% | -1 | -5 |
| Romine Reading | 15% | 16% | 0 | 15% | 0 | 0 |
| Romine Science | 13% | 20% | +7 | 12% | -8 | -1 |
| Romine Cumulative | -1 | -15 | -16 | |||
| Stephens Math | 34% | 28% | -7 | 23% | -5 | -12 |
| Stephens English | 54% | 49% | -6 | 45% | -4 | -9 |
| Stephens Reading | 15% | 18% | +3 | 13% | -5 | -2 |
| Stephens Science | 12% | 16% | +3 | 10% | -6 | -3 |
| Stephens Cumulative | -7 | -19 | -25 | |||
| Terry Math | 59% | 56% | -3 | 44% | -12 | -15 |
| Terry English | 72% | 69% | -3 | 62% | -7 | -10 |
| Terry Reading | 40% | 34% | -7 | 40% | +6 | 0 |
| Terry Science | 33% | 32% | -1 | 31% | 0 | -1 |
| Terry Cumulative | -14 | -13 | -27 | |||
| Wakefield Math | 24% | 42% | +18 | 39% | -3 | +15 |
| Wakefield English | 54% | 51% | -3 | 47% | -5 | -8 |
| Wakefield Reading | 16% | 19% | +3 | 20% | +2 | +4 |
| Wakefield Science | 12% | 19% | +6 | 18% | 0 | +6 |
| Wakefield Cumulative | +24 | -6 | +17 | |||
| Washington Math | 23% | 30% | +7 | 18% | -12 | -5 |
| Washington English | 37% | 44% | +7 | 46% | +1 | +9 |
| Washington Reading | 15% | 15% | -1 | 10% | -4 | -5 |
| Washington Science | 14% | 15% | +1 | 10% | -5 | -3 |
| Washington Cumulative | +14 | -20 | -5 | |||
| Watson Math | 18% | 21% | -3 | 19% | -2 | +1 |
| Watson English | 32% | 43% | +11 | 38% | -5 | +6 |
| Watson Reading | 9% | 14% | +6 | 16% | +1 | +7 |
| Watson Science | 6% | 12% | +6 | 11% | -1 | +5 |
| Watson Cumulative | +20 | -7 | +19 | |||
| Western Hills Math | 29% | 40% | +11 | 35% | -5 | +6 |
| Western Hills English | 63% | 64% | +1 | 57% | -6 | -5 |
| Western Hills Reading | 25% | 21% | -4 | 26% | +5 | +1 |
| Western Hills Science | 25% | 21% | -4 | 26% | +6 | +2 |
| Western Hills Cumulative | +4 | 0 | +4 | |||
| Williams Math | 68% | 71% | +3 | 71% | 1 | +3 |
| Williams English | 84% | 79% | -6 | 83% | +5 | -1 |
| Williams Reading | 52% | 56% | +4 | 55% | -1 | +3 |
| Williams Science | 54% | 57% | +3 | 54% | -3 | 0 |
| Williams Cumulative | +4 | +2 | +5 | |||
| Forest Heights STEM (K-8) Math | 64% | 69% | +6 | 65% | -5 | +1 |
| Forest Heights STEM (K-8) English | 88% | 87% | -1 | 89% | -2 | +1 |
| Forest Heights STEM (K-8) Reading | 57% | 58% | +1 | 59% | +1 | +2 |
| Forest Heights STEM (K-8) Science | 59% | 62% | +3 | 59 | -3 | 0 |
| Forest Heights STEM (K-8) Cumulative | +9 | -5 | +5 | |||
| *Cloverdale Math | 16% | 17% | +1 | 11% | -5 | -4 |
| *Cloverdale English | 41% | 45% | +3 | 42% | -2 | +1 |
| *Cloverdale Reading | 13% | 18% | +6 | 17% | -1 | -5 |
| *Cloverdale Science | 11% | 16% | +5 | 13% | -2 | +2 |
| *Cloverdale Cumulative | +15 | -11 | +4 | |||
| Dunbar Math | 23% | 34% | +11 | 24% | -10 | +1 |
| Dunbar English | 55% | 61% | +7 | 54% | -7 | 0 |
| Dunbar Reading | 29% | 32% | +3 | 23% | -8 | -6 |
| Dunbar Science | 20% | 26% | +6 | 19% | -7 | -1 |
| Dunbar Cumulative | +27 | -32 | -6 | |||
| *Henderson Math | 18% | 18% | 0 | 17% | -1 | -1 |
| *Henderson English | 46% | 53% | +7 | 51% | -2 | +5 |
| *Henderson Reading | 22% | 23% | +1 | 19% | -4 | -3 |
| *Henderson Science | 13% | 15% | +2 | 12% | -3 | -1 |
| *Henderson Cumulative | +10 | -10 | 0 | |||
| Mabelvale Math | 20% | 29% | +9 | 24% | -5 | +4 |
| Mabelvale English | 54% | 51% | -3 | 53% | +2 | -2 |
| Mabelvale Reading | 20% | 22% | +2 | 23% | +1 | +3 |
| Mabelvale Science | 14% | 14% | 0 | 15% | +2 | +1 |
| Mabelvale Cumulative | +8 | -1 | +6 | |||
| Mann Math | 38% | 44% | +6 | 44% | 0 | +6 |
| Mann English | 71% | 70% | -1 | 72% | +3 | +1 |
| Mann Reading | 40% | 40% | 0 | 38% | -1 | -1 |
| Mann Science | 34% | 40% | +6 | 34% | -7 | 0 |
| Mann Cumulative | +11 | -5 | +6 | |||
| Pinnacle View Math | NA | 64% | NA | 56% | -8 | NA |
| Pinnacle View English | NA | 85% | NA | 79% | -5 | NA |
| Pinnacle View Reading | NA | 54% | NA | 54% | 0 | NA |
| Pinnacle View Science | NA | 57% | NA | 56% | -1 | NA |
| Pinnacle View Cumulative | NA | -14 | NA | |||
| Pulaski Heights Math | 49% | 49% | 0 | 50% | +1 | +1 |
| Pulaski Heights English | 75% | 71% | -4 | 74% | +3 | -1 |
| Pulaski Heights Reading | 45% | 45% | +1 | 48% | +2 | +3 |
| Pulaski Heights Science | 46% | 42% | -4 | 42% | 0 | -4 |
| Pulaski Heights Cumulative | -7 | +6 | -1 | |||
| Central Math | 32% | 33% | +1 | 37% | +4 | +5 |
| Central English | 60% | 64% | +4 | 58% | -5 | -2 |
| Central Reading | 43% | 43% | +1 | 39% | -4 | -3 |
| Central Science | 32% | 37% | +5 | 37% | -1 | +5 |
| Central Cumulative | +11 | -6 | +4 | |||
| *Fair Math | 5% | 5% | +1 | 5% | 0 | +1 |
| *Fair English | 30% | 29% | -1 | 25% | -4 | -5 |
| *Fair Reading | 13% | 14% | +1 | 9% | -5 | -4 |
| *Fair Science | 4% | 5% | +1 | 4% | -1 | 0 |
| *Fair Cumulative | +2 | -10 | -7 | |||
| *Hall Math | 2% | 4% | +2 | 4% | 0 | +2 |
| *Hall English | 19% | 21% | +2 | 18% | -2 | 0 |
| *Hall Reading | 8% | 11% | +3 | 10% | -1 | +2 |
| *Hall Science | 2% | 4% | +2 | 4% | +1 | +2 |
| *Hall Cumulative | +9 | -3 | +6 | |||
| *McClellan Math | 4% | 6% | +2 | 7% | 0 | +2 |
| *McClellan English | 26% | 22% | -4 | 27% | +5 | +1 |
| *McClellan Reading | 10% | 14% | +4 | 12% | -2 | +2 |
| *McClellan Science | 4% | 8% | +4 | 8% | 0 | +4 |
| *McClellan Cumulative | +6 | +3 | +9 | |||
| Parkview Math | 22% | 29% | +7 | 27% | -2 | +5 |
| Parkview English | 57% | 62% | +5 | 56% | -6 | -1 |
| Parkview Reading | 33% | 45% | +13 | 32% | -13 | -1 |
| Parkview Science | 27% | 29% | +2 | 26% | -3 | -1 |
| Parkview Cumulative | +27 | -23 | +3 |
On ACT Aspire, in 152 (38 schools, 4 subjects each) opportunities for one-year growth in 2016-17:
- 103 Improved
- 43 Declined
- 6 Stayed Same
- Bale and Terry Declined in All Subjects
- Greatest one-year growth was Jefferson: +46
- Greatest one-year decline was Bale: -17
On ACT Aspire, in 160 opportunities for one-year growth in 2017-18:
- 48 Improved
- 93 Declined
- 19 Stayed Same
- Baseline, Gibbs, Mabelvale Elem., Otter Creek, Stephens, Cloverdale, Dunbar, Henderson, Parkview Declined in All Subjects
- Chicot, Roberts, Romine, Pinnacle View, Fair Declined or Stayed Same in All Subjects
- Greatest one-year growth was Carver: +25
- Greatest one-year decline was Dunbar: -32
On ACT Aspire, in 152 opportunities for two-year growth in 2017-18:
- 81 Improved
- 62 Declined
- 9 Stayed Same
- Otter Creek and Stephens Declined in All Subjects
- Romine and Terry Declined or Stayed Same in All Subjects
- Greatest two-year growth was Jefferson: +57
- Greatest two-year decline was Terry: -27
NOTE: Principal Sandra Register left Terry for Jefferson
Leadership Ranking (ACT Aspire 1-Year Growth/Decline)
- 12 Improved; 2 Stayed Same; 27 Declined
- Carver (Principal Clifton Woodley): +25
- Bale (Principal Roxie Browning): +19
- Brady (Principal Tyrone Harris): +16
- Rockefeller (Principal Shoutell Richardson): +16
- Meadowcliff (Principal Cynthia Collins): +12
- Fulbright (Principal Sherkeyer Jackson): +10
- Jefferson (Principal Sandra Register): +10
- Booker (Principal Cheryl Carson): +7
- Pulaski Heights Middle (Principal Daryl Powell): +6
- McClellan (Principal Patricia A. Ellis Brunston): +3
- Williams (Principal Connie Green): +2
- Dodd (Principal Melinda Modica): +1
- Forest Park (Principal Theresa Courtney-Ketcher): 0
- Western Hills (Principal Teresa Richardson): 0
- Mabelvale Elementary (Principal Darian L. Smith): -1
- Mabelvale Middle (Principal Rhonda Hall): -1
- Chicot (Principal E. Yvonne Jones): -3
- Hall (Principal Mark Roberts): -3
- Forest Heights STEM (Principal Amy Cooper): -5
- Mann (Principal Keith McGee): -5
- Roberts (Steven Helmick): -5
- Central (Principal Nancy Rousseau): -6
- Wakefield (Principal Les Taylor): -6
- Watson (Principal ?): -7
- King (Principal Karen Carter): -9
- Fair (Principal Michael Anthony): -10
- Henderson (Principal Replaced): -10
- Cloverdale (Principal Wanda Ruffins): -11
- Pulaski Heights Elementary (Principal Anna Lloyd): -13
- Terry (Principal Stephanie Franklin): -13
- *Pinnacle View (Principal Jay Pickering): -14
- Mabelvale Elementary (Principal Darian L. Smith): -15
- Otter Creek (Principal Wendy Minor): -15
- Romine (Principal Suzanne Ray Proctor): -15
- McDermott (Principal Pam Dial): -19
- Stephens (Principal Phillip Carlock): -19
- Washington (Principal Katherine Snyder): -20
- Gibbs (Principal Tina Greenwood): -23
- Parkview (Principal Randy Rutherford): -23
- Baseline (Principal Replaced): -30
- Dunbar (Principal Eunice Thrasher): -32
* Grew from 6th Grade to 6th and 7th Grades
Leadership Ranking (ACT Aspire 2-Year Growth/Decline)
- 23 Improved; 1 Stayed Same; 14 Declined
- Jefferson (Principal Sandra Register): +57
- Carver (Principal Clifton Woodley): +41
- Brady (Principal Tyrone Harris): +29
- Rockefeller (Principal Shoutell Richardson): +28
- Watson (Principal ?): +19
- Meadowcliff (Principal Cynthia Collins): +17
- Wakefield (Principal Les Taylor): +17
- Pulaski Heights Elementary (Principal Anna Lloyd): +14
- Dodd (Principal Melinda Modica): +13
- Booker (Principal Cheryl Carson): +9
- McClellan (Principal Patricia A. Ellis Brunston): +9
- Mabelvale Elementary (Principal Darian L. Smith): +7
- Hall (Principal Mark Roberts): +6
- Mabelvale Middle (Principal Rhonda Hall): +6
- Mann (Principal Keith McGee): +6
- Forest Heights STEM (Principal Amy Cooper): +5
- Williams (Principal Connie Green): +5
- Central (Principal Nancy Rousseau): +4
- Cloverdale (Principal Wanda Ruffins): +4
- Fulbright (Principal Sherkeyer Jackson): +4
- Western Hills (Principal Teresa Richardson): +4
- Parkview (Principal Randy Rutherford): +3
- Bale (Principal Roxie Browning): +2
- Henderson (Principal Replaced): 0
- Pulaski Heights Middle (Principal Daryl Powell): -1
- Roberts (Steven Helmick): -1
- King (Principal Karen Carter): -3
- Forest Park (Principal Theresa Courtney-Ketcher): -4
- Washington (Principal Katherine Snyder): -5
- Dunbar (Principal Eunice Thrasher): -6
- Fair (Principal Michael Anthony): -7
- Otter Creek (Principal Wendy Minor): -8
- Baseline (Principal Replaced): -9
- Gibbs (Principal Tina Greenwood): -13
- McDermott (Principal Pam Dial): -16
- Romine (Principal Suzanne Ray Proctor): -16
- Stephens (Principal Phillip Carlock): -25
- Terry (Principal Stephanie Franklin): -27
* Grew from 6th Grade to 6th and 7th Grades
- 10 Elementary and 2 Secondary Schools Cumulatively Declined Over Both One Year and Two:
- Baseline (Principal Replaced)
- Dunbar (Principal Eunice Thrasher)
- Fair (Principal Michael Anthony)
- Gibbs (Principal Tina Greenwood)
- King (Principal Karen Carter)
- McDermott (Principal Pam Dial)
- Otter Creek (Principal Wendy Minor)
- Roberts (Principal Seven Helmick)
- Romine (Principal Suzanne Ray Proctor)
- Stephens (Principal Phillip Carlock)
- Terry (Principal Stephanie Franklin)
- Washington (Principal Katherine Snyder)
- 10 Elementary and 1 Secondary Schools Cumulatively Improved Over Both One Year and Two:
- Bale (Principal Roxie Browning)
- Booker (Principal Cheryl Carson)
- Brady (Principal Tyrone Harris)
- Carver (Principal Clifton Woodley)
- Dodd (Principal Melinda Modica)
- Fulbright (Principal Sherkeyer Jackson)
- Jefferson (Principal Sandra Register)
- McClellan (Principal Patricia A. Ellis Brunston)
- Meadowcliff (Principal Cynthia Collins)
- Rockefeller (Principal Shoutell Richardson)
- Williams (Principal Connie Green)
ACT (Grade 11) – Percentage of Students Meeting/Exceeding Readiness
| 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 1-Year Growth | 2017-18 | 1-Year Growth | 2-Year Growth | |
| State Math | 24% | 24% | 0 | 24% | 0 | 0 |
| State English | 49% | 49% | 0 | 48% | -1 | -1 |
| State Reading | 31% | 30% | -1 | 30% | 0 | -1 |
| State Science | 24% | 21% | -3 | 22% | -1 | -2 |
| State All Four Subjects | 14% | 14% | 0 | 14% | 0 | 0 |
| LRSD Math | 20% | 20% | 0 | 19% | -1 | -1 |
| LRSD English | 41% | 39% | -2 | 40% | +1 | -1 |
| LRSD Reading | 29% | 26% | -3 | 27% | +1 | -2 |
| LRSD Science | 21% | 18% | -3 | 19% | +1 | -2 |
| LRSD All Four Subjects | 14% | 13% | -1 | 14% | +1 | 0 |
| Central Math | 32% | 37% | +5 | 33% | -4 | +1 |
| Central English | 53% | 56% | +3 | 54% | -2 | +1 |
| Central Reading | 40% | 43% | +3 | 30% | -13 | -10 |
| Central Science | 31% | 33% | +2 | 33% | 0 | +2 |
| Central All Four Subjects | 22% | 27% | +5 | 25% | -2 | +3 |
| Fair Math | 2% | 4% | +2 | 1% | -3 | -1 |
| Fair English | 16% | 15% | -1 | 16% | +1 | 0 |
| Fair Reading | 7% | 7% | 0 | 6% | -1 | -1 |
| Fair Science | 3% | 4% | +1 | 1% | -3 | -2 |
| Fair All Four Subjects | 2% | 1% | -1 | 0% | -1 | -2 |
| Hall Math | 3% | 2% | -1 | 4% | +2 | -1 |
| Hall English | 17% | 8% | -9 | 19% | +9 | +2 |
| Hall Reading | 12% | 3% | -9 | 9% | +6 | -3 |
| Hall Science | 4% | 1% | -3 | 3% | +2 | -1 |
| Hall All Four Subjects | 2% | 0 | -2 | 2% | +2 | 0 |
| McClellan Math | 5% | 6% | +1 | 3% | -3 | -2 |
| McClellan English | 13% | 15% | +2 | 11% | -4 | -2 |
| McClellan Reading | 5% | 3% | -2 | 4% | +1 | -1 |
| McClellan Science | 2% | 3% | +1 | 0% | -3 | -2 |
| McClellan All Four Subjects | 1% | 1% | 0 | 0% | -1 | -1 |
| Parkview Math | 23% | 17% | -6 | 20% | +3 | -3 |
| Parkview English | 61% | 51% | -10 | 52% | +1 | -9 |
| Parkview Reading | 41% | 30% | -11 | 34% | +4 | -7 |
| Parkview Science | 28% | 16% | -12 | 20% | +4 | -8 |
| Parkview All Four Subjects | 16% | 9% | -7 | 13% | +4 | -3 |
On ACT, in 25 (5 schools, 5 areas each) opportunities for one-year growth in 2016-17:
- 10 Improved
- 13 Declined
- 2 Stayed Same
- Hall and Parkview Declined in All Subjects
- State and District Declined or Stayed Same in All Subjects
- Greatest one-year growth was Central +18
- Greatest one-year decline was Parkview -46
On ACT, in 25 opportunities for one-year growth in 2017-18:
- 12 Improved
- 12 Declined
- 1 Stayed Same
- 0 Declined in All Subjects
- State and Central Declined or Stayed Same in All Subjects
- Greatest one-year growth was Hall +21
- Greatest one-year decline was Central -21
On ACT, in 25 opportunities for two-year growth in 2017-18:
- 5 Improved
- 18 Declined
- 2 Stayed Same
- McClellan and Parkview Declined in All Subjects
- State, District and Hall Declined or Stayed Same in All Subjects
- While no high school had two-year growth, the least decline was a tie Central and Hall -3
Leadership Ranking (ACT 1-Year Growth/Decline)
- Hall (Principal Mark Roberts): +21
- Parkview (Principal Randy Rutherford): +16
- Fair (Principal Michael Anthony): -7
- McClellan (Principal Patricia Ellis-Brunston): -8
- Central (Principal Nancy Rousseau): -21
Leadership Ranking (ACT 2-Year Growth/Decline)
- Hall (Principal Mark Roberts – Only Responsible for One Year): -3
- Central (Principal Nancy Rousseau): -3
- Fair (Principal Michael Anthony): -6
- McClellan (Principal Patricia Ellis-Brunston): -10
- Parkview (Principal Randy Rutherford – Only Responsible for One Year): -30
Conclusion
Undoubtedly, progress has been made in the Litte Rock School District – in equity, in budget, in infrastructure. However, the district was taken over because of Academic Distress, and its progress (or lack thereof) in academics is woefully inadequate. In fact, rather than improving even incrementally, it is declining in most areas. Immediate, transformational, student-focused actions must be taken to, at the very least, ensure the district consistently improves in all areas by all measures.
That begins and ends with leadership. A school board (or in this case, the Arkansas Department of Education Commissioner acting in place of the board) hires one person to run the district – the superintendent. In Little Rock, the current superintendent and his predecessors have inexplicably chosen to retain (and in one case promote) the two deputies who have long presided over the academic decline of the district.
By simply examining the one and two-year improvement/decline in each of the schools, it is readily evident which building-level leaders are getting the job done on behalf of students and which are not.
The Little Rock School District’s challenges and opportunities are all about leadership – in the district, in the buildings, and in the classrooms. At all levels, any adults standing in the way of student success should gracefully step aside or be as swiftly removed as the previous board.
Disclaimer: Because data entered and calculated manually from Arkansas Department of Education, we welcome any correction(s).