[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6682086,"mediaKeyId","2312781-7ea9422f0cefa47b88f7f28e343158fd","parentId",2312781,"title","Board requests review of safety and security policies after personnel hearing highlights procedural concerns","audioSeconds",303,"startMs",5631000,"endMs",5934000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2312781-7ea9422f0cefa47b88f7f28e343158fd&start=5631&end=5934","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2312781-7ea9422f0cefa47b88f7f28e343158fd/thumbnail_5631000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6682086/Arkansas/Board-requests-review-of-safety-and-security-policies-after-personnel-hearing-highlights-procedural-concerns","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6682086-55120c1b1c0c037b4866b8e8cbe8bdba/orig.mp4?Expires=1776177063&Signature=deTIV1FggjfLApjGfaLVNMNQXQh-~Ueb~QxcXsucDMt2A4HtCpZ0Uw5u4deuyU6ltGxR5w1AxFNTH~pTN9tQPJfj721djHy~afbTw-STuR3aaMoTSWDVXrNdVN7~engPWmfQKOrkQaVoCBcRORg0kbreW9Ij9jRhTsqQoaGsHRHaznWj0W5KKxKSP6WiSsRJaGfcx47OEGBb6fifRciJlKnM91oqxgLtrsAFJ2Zs0E8FmaCLAC3q66Oj8buv90NWqKeLhoKkvgGLvoyeUeQJN4lE-UB6wwPZBPca9nykdGXMAr5s1cvC8Qi3mMbcose6GxdQIcOyEctiTqrunBh5~g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT","date","2025-02-14T03:17:47.573Z","article","Board members asked for a comprehensive review of the Little Rock School District’s safety and security operations after a personnel hearing and public discussion during the Feb. 13 meeting.

Several trustees, including Director Rose, said the hearing exposed gaps and inconsistencies in organizational roles, titles and investigative protocols within the district’s safety and security function. Trustees raised questions about the use of military-style ranks (lieutenant, sergeant, captain) for school security staff, unclear lines of accountability, and whether safety investigators report through the appropriate chain of command.

Director Rose specifically requested that the district safety director appear at a future board meeting to present the department’s policies, procedures and table of organization, and to explain the role and supervisory structure for investigators and campus officers. Other trustees said they want the department to identify whether current practices expose staff or students to inconsistent treatment and to provide a written operations manual.

Trustees also discussed due-process protections for employees involved in internal investigations. Members said they want the investigation policy language clarified to prevent interviews from becoming coercive interrogations and to ensure fairness for employees. The Personnel Policy Committee had previously expressed concerns about the investigation policy, and the recent hearing reinforced the need for the board to review the policy wording.

No formal action was taken at the meeting beyond a request for staff to bring the safety and security policies and procedures to a future agenda. Board members signaled an interest in receiving the documents in advance to allow time for review.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Special Board Meeting - Feb 13 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Following a personnel hearing that exposed confusion about ranks, reporting lines and investigative procedures in the district’s safety and security department, board members requested a formal presentation of the department’s policies and procedures and signaled interest in clearer organization and investigative protocols.","taxTitle","LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, School Districts, Arkansas","taxId",13594,"location","Arkansas","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6682091,"Board hears proposal to partner with Teach For America’s Spark pathway to license novice teachers",3785,2987000,6772000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2312781-7ea9422f0cefa47b88f7f28e343158fd&start=2987&end=6772","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2312781-7ea9422f0cefa47b88f7f28e343158fd/thumbnail_2987000.jpg","/articles/6682091/Arkansas/Board-hears-proposal-to-partner-with-Teach-For-Americas-Spark-pathway-to-license-novice-teachers","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6682091-63dd33df27e8d24b7eab74973219d593/orig.mp4?Expires=1776177063&Signature=lPGyK9sHZWUKnmWXKDSVHLcFuXNZscVkg24bigjlY9YywI0TzP9RU1mY76Sh1xCgboVdX5tezVZJyUkabGPMm7vJvzoJHWe8Vj6J-j159SWhA5LNrA1fvr8-~bFdwA8lIFZifdmIswqidJ9fFsSs9RvhIuKdlFwBiUwIlV8wdyP3inYVGfUjzNX1IEavBhGsJUUn09KQ~SqgyWFA91OKjGkvGnxdEtGzqfMnMdJi6xpU0YUAkmbyJ8HHejMzsAnUDZnGD2MeFfitFZET~G8EIzvRwq86ol7WrxNUD3CYiZTw-rnID6abdZ0MVcdPKTEAWUXv2lfA9ftQ3l0ohXsrrg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Little Rock School District staff and Teach For America representatives described a proposed partnership on Feb. 13 to enroll district staff and paraprofessionals with bachelor’s degrees in TFA’s Spark residency, a pathway that combines preservice training, mentorship and an Arkansas-approved licensure route.

District novice-teacher staff said the district currently has a substantial number of new teachers without standard licenses; the staff member coordinating novice-teacher supports said roughly 94 teachers in tested, high‑need areas (special education, science, ELA, math) were either unlicensed or had not identified a route to licensure, and many relied on emergency teacher permits. The district presented the partnership as a way to keep qualified adults already working in LRSD classrooms and paraprofessionals in the district while they pursue licensing.

Teach For America representatives described Spark as a program that can bring candidates into a licensure pathway that does not require passing the Praxis as an entry condition and offers summer training, ongoing coaching and a two‑year supported placement. TFA representatives said historically a high percentage of TFA participants remain in education after their initial commitment; district staff said the Spark pathway’s Arkansas-approved licensure route was the key attraction because it helps candidates keep their employment while working toward standard licensure.

Board members asked about costs: the draft MOU cited a fee structure that includes an administrative fee and a line item identified in the draft as $6,000 per teacher per year (for up to two years) that the district would pay TFA for each participant. Staff said the district would propose a capped cohort size to control expenditure and explore alternative funding sources (state grants, private foundation, district funds). Board members also pressed for clearer contractual language, a proposed cohort size and an estimate of the total district cost before any binding commitment.

Trustees asked for details about retention: district and TFA presenters said data show many TFA alumni remain in education, and staff emphasized the district’s goal of targeting existing paraprofessionals and staff (so-called “grow‑your‑own” talent) rather than relying solely on external applicants. No contract or MOU was approved at the meeting; the board requested revised contract language and a budget estimate that would include a cap on annual district exposure before further action.","District leaders and Teach For America representatives discussed a proposed MOU to recruit, train and license novice teachers through TFA’s Spark residency pathway; key issues raised included cost, cohort size, licensure outcomes and contract language.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6682094,"LRSD presents ATLAS interim results, Ignite tutoring update and state value-added findings",1366,503000,1869000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2312781-7ea9422f0cefa47b88f7f28e343158fd&start=503&end=1869","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2312781-7ea9422f0cefa47b88f7f28e343158fd/thumbnail_503000.jpg","/articles/6682094/Arkansas/LRSD-presents-ATLAS-interim-results-Ignite-tutoring-update-and-state-value-added-findings","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6682094-1b3625a5d72c3eb58b3cd7d884d69ed9/orig.mp4?Expires=1776177063&Signature=NwU9ogkckKg-72Sd9zn7gi9hJIQpWNYJxtYAlm2ApK7l-RuQM64ugmRUvv-~1G9Jl~4ZO0Nuk77U1-HZp2kymzBt4KwO6Jf8ys~LVFrO741PU8C3ZvzFUmABNJthDEmM~WcayGTDUXP9Wb7QcPNzeLD-byX3pIevQMitxdiRUrqX4AIXbMfNbx8scehj52Xd450pRk2pPIoZ8~dFnYIrf7DVkmISdntQzo-ovh8LTlFXEsXg0LOsk8kY7GNM4dXAcBP8k5UlHvM0Koh4d7I0eXjzozWy0hcJGDlClV2uoFIOJ9FEe0Eb6JwdOfLcb7VdZcZuDpCHOh~I8qqFuQZdBA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At its Feb. 13 agenda meeting, Little Rock School District staff presented three related academic updates: ATLAS interim assessment results, a midyear report on the Ignite 1-to-1 virtual tutoring program, and a summary of the Arkansas value‑added student-growth model.

District presenters described the ATLAS interim as an optional December assessment aligned to end‑of‑year standards and urged trustees to interpret results as a “moment in time.” The district cautioned that some standards included in the interim had not yet been taught to students, so the test shows both what students have learned so far and what they have yet to receive in instruction. Staff said the district’s early grades (third, fourth and eighth in several subjects) are closer to state levels in some areas, but students at “level 1” (limited understanding) lag behind the state and are a districtwide priority.

The board heard a school-level example from Fulbright Elementary, where Principal Jackson and assistant principal Swift described school data work and the use of “Falcon Time” (a scheduled intervention block) to reteach standards and provide interventions for students at lower performance levels.

District staff then reviewed Ignite, a 1-to-1 virtual tutoring intervention the district uses for targeted students in network 3. The program currently serves 350 seats funded by a state grant; attendance for the tutoring sessions during the December–January instructional window was reported at roughly 79 percent. Staff said Ignite tutors meet students daily for about 15 minutes and that when students are progress-monitored, they pass the current skill protocol about 77 percent of the time. Principals from participating schools, including McDermott, told the board Ignite provides targeted, individual practice for foundational reading skills and that the program is especially helpful when building-level intervention time is insufficient.

Board members asked whether the district could expand seats (350 is the current grant-funded number), how students are prioritized for seats (the district said it targeted the bottom 25% in network 3 and allocated seats by school size), and how the district will sustain or expand Ignite if additional funding is not available. Staff said Ignite costs roughly $2,500 per seat and that a 100-seat expansion would cost about $250,000; the board discussed state funding, private foundation support, and district budget trade-offs as potential avenues.

Finally, district staff summarized Arkansas’s value-added student growth model, which for this year used a three-year historical baseline to estimate expected growth. Staff said the model showed stronger outcomes in ELA overall (third, fifth, seventh and eighth grades met growth expectations) and more mixed results in math, but that an important pattern emerged across content areas: students in performance levels 2–4 generally met growth expectations while students at level 1 did not. Staff noted English learners and some subpopulations showed consistent growth in several grades, and they recommended continued emphasis on early literacy, expanded structured intervention blocks (wind/Falcon time), and targeted work on math instruction.

District leaders said these items will inform school-level interventions, professional development and budget priorities; the board did not take a formal vote on the presentations, which were informational.","District staff reviewed midyear ATLAS interim assessment results, an Ignite virtual tutoring midyear report showing progress for participating students, and a state value-added student growth model summary; leaders said early-grade gains are promising but students at the lowest performance level need more progress.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6682098,"Little Rock School District board approves personnel report at special meeting",29,369000,398000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2312781-7ea9422f0cefa47b88f7f28e343158fd&start=369&end=398","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2312781-7ea9422f0cefa47b88f7f28e343158fd/thumbnail_369000.jpg","/articles/6682098/Arkansas/Little-Rock-School-District-board-approves-personnel-report-at-special-meeting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6682098-75fadd25388bf660364b4718ed622a46/orig.mp4?Expires=1776177064&Signature=DoiAstB4KEEZdTHbdZStvAnwSdN0k4x7DBPdUH75Ai3xLlbnlJyZBCaBNpZsYkgw~fow8Xn197n2rBxiKXuO8ze14M8MjcFCI9ShG6-WLhPEuUrgkElTrIFP9dSawgvlz-311uPq8fTUDGu33VWJQbixCr7~tUidNAtHE8Wqy4nnyyr7YSysZ5pBCx27RR3AjsJiTUhtciRQBxRgoOGRZY8h7WKVpK9qb6neqAICcuXzX8L3d~uwm3jYyfbbt0kcdKEW8BF9RwpXsmCViKo~yaoWR-zcsrTKkA5JrNqQZ3CqRmFrxbEZ9eTCtyN61RgZFAlfSrvFGOGl1w0Z~DVjGw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Little Rock School District Board of Education approved a district personnel report during a special meeting on Feb. 13, 2025.

Board members moved and seconded a motion to approve the personnel changes as submitted, and the chair called the vote. A voice vote was recorded as “Aye” with no opposition announced; the motion carried. The district staff present said the personnel items include resignations that are often timed for the end of the school year and include retirements and staff who are moving or changing careers.

Board members asked whether the district conducts exit interviews and whether hiring freezes had been considered for district-level (above-building) positions. District staff said they do collect resignation reasons but have not yet produced a full survey; they also said many of the vacancies being filled are at the school and classified levels, not at the central office. Staff noted some positions have gone unfilled for months and that the district has been selective about filling roles above the building level.

The board’s action was procedural: approve the submitted district personnel report so schools can proceed with filling positions and with allocation decisions. The transcript did not include a roll-call tally of votes, names of the mover and seconder, or the full personnel list.","Board members voted to approve a district personnel report that lists resignations, retirements and other staffing changes; no detailed vote tally was recorded in the public transcript.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board requests review of safety and security policies after personnel hearing highlights procedural concerns

Board hears proposal to partner with Teach For America’s Spark pathway to license novice teachers

LRSD presents ATLAS interim results, Ignite tutoring update and state value-added findings

Little Rock School District board approves personnel report at special meeting