Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Glover
Districts Schools
Select an Org
View Previous Year
2016
View Next Year
print page

2016 Accountability Data - Glover
Organization Information
District:Marblehead (01680000)School type:Elementary School
School:Glover (01680020)Grades served:PK,K,01,02,03
Region:NortheastTitle I status:Non-Title I School (NT)
Accountability and Assistance Level:Level 1
 Summary > 2016
2016 English Language Arts Proficiency Gap Narrowing
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Baseline CPI 2015 CPI 2016 CPI CPI Change 2016 Target 6 Year Goal CPI Percentile in School Type N PPI Points Rating
All studentsCPI = 98.1, Target = 96.6CPI = 98.1, Target = 96.6CPI = 98.1, Target = 96.6 94.1 93.2 98.1 4.9 96.6 97.1 9892100Above Target
High needs -------24--
Econ. Disadvantaged -------6--
EL and Former EL -------8--
Students w/ disabilities -------13--
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. ----------
Asian -------1--
Afr. Amer./Black ----------
Hispanic/Latino -------1--
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. -------1--
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. ----------
WhiteCPI = 98, Target = 96.9CPI = 98, Target = 96.9CPI = 98, Target = 96.9 94.6 95.4 98.0 2.6 96.9 97.3 9589100Above Target
Summary > 2016
2016 Mathematics Proficiency Gap Narrowing
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Baseline CPI 2015 CPI 2016 CPI CPI Change 2016 Target 6 Year Goal CPI Percentile in School Type N PPI Points Rating
All studentsCPI = 96.5, Target = 96.2CPI = 96.5, Target = 96.2 93.4 94.0 96.5 2.5 96.2 96.7 9092100Above Target
High needs -------24--
Econ. Disadvantaged -------6--
EL and Former EL -------8--
Students w/ disabilities -------13--
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. ----------
Asian -------1--
Afr. Amer./Black ----------
Hispanic/Latino -------1--
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. -------1--
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. ----------
WhiteCPI = 96.6, Target = 96.2CPI = 96.6, Target = 96.2 93.5 96.2 96.6 0.4 96.2 96.8 8589100Above Target
Summary > 2016
2016 Science Proficiency Gap Narrowing
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Baseline CPI 2015 CPI 2016 CPI CPI Change 2016 Target 6 Year Goal CPI Percentile in School Type N PPI Points Rating
All students ----------
High needs ----------
Econ. Disadvantaged ----------
EL and Former EL ----------
Students w/ disabilities ----------
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. ----------
Asian ----------
Afr. Amer./Black ----------
Hispanic/Latino ----------
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. ----------
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. ----------
White ----------
Summary > 2016
2016 English Language Arts Extra Credit
  Extra credit for increasing % Advanced (10% or more) Extra credit for decreasing % Warning/Failing (10% or more)
2015
% Advanced		 2016
% Advanced		 N PPI Points 2015
% Warning/Failing		 2016
% Warning/Failing		 N PPI Points
All students 27.0 44.69225 1.4 0.09225
High needs--24---24-
Econ. Disadvantaged--6---6-
EL and Former EL--8---8-
Students w/ disabilities--13---13-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.--------
Asian--1---1-
Afr. Amer./Black--------
Hispanic/Latino--1---1-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.--1---1-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.--------
White 29.2 46.18925 0.0 0.08925
Summary > 2016
2016 Mathematics Extra Credit
  Extra credit for increasing % Advanced (10% or more) Extra credit for decreasing % Warning/Failing (10% or more)
2015
% Advanced		 2016
% Advanced		 N PPI Points 2015
% Warning/Failing		 2016
% Warning/Failing		 N PPI Points
All students 37.3 63.09225 4.0 0.09225
High needs--24---24-
Econ. Disadvantaged--6---6-
EL and Former EL--8---8-
Students w/ disabilities--13---13-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.--------
Asian--1---1-
Afr. Amer./Black--------
Hispanic/Latino--1---1-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.--1---1-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.--------
White 40.9 62.98925 1.5 0.08925
Summary > 2016
2016 Science Extra Credit
  Extra credit for increasing % Advanced (10% or more) Extra credit for decreasing % Warning/Failing (10% or more)
2015
% Advanced		 2016
% Advanced		 N PPI Points 2015
% Warning/Failing		 2016
% Warning/Failing		 N PPI Points
All students--------
High needs--------
Econ. Disadvantaged--------
EL and Former EL--------
Students w/ disabilities--------
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.--------
Asian--------
Afr. Amer./Black--------
Hispanic/Latino--------
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.--------
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.--------
White--------
Summary > 2016
2016 English Language Arts Growth
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2015 SGP 2016 SGP SGP Change 6 Year Goal Met Safe Harbor? N PPI Points Rating
All students --- 51.0----
High needs --- 51.0----
Econ. Disadvantaged --- 51.0----
EL and Former EL --- 51.0----
Students w/ disabilities --- 51.0----
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. --- 51.0----
Asian --- 51.0----
Afr. Amer./Black --- 51.0----
Hispanic/Latino --- 51.0----
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. --- 51.0----
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. --- 51.0----
White --- 51.0----
Summary > 2016
2016 Mathematics Growth
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2015 SGP 2016 SGP SGP Change 6 Year Goal Met Safe Harbor? N PPI Points Rating
All students --- 51.0----
High needs --- 51.0----
Econ. Disadvantaged --- 51.0----
EL and Former EL --- 51.0----
Students w/ disabilities --- 51.0----
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. --- 51.0----
Asian --- 51.0----
Afr. Amer./Black --- 51.0----
Hispanic/Latino --- 51.0----
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. --- 51.0----
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. --- 51.0----
White --- 51.0----
Summary > 2016
2016 Extra credit for English language proficiency growth
  2016 SGPA 2016 Target SGPA N Included PPI Points
All students- 60.014-
High needs- 60.014-
EL and Former EL- 60.014-
Summary > 2016
2016 Assessment Participation
  English Language Arts Mathematics Science
Enrolled Assessed % Met Target (95%) Enrolled Assessed % Met Target (95%) Enrolled Assessed % Met Target (95%)
All students9393100Yes9393100Yes----
High needs25---25-------
Econ. Disadvantaged6---6-------
EL and Former EL8---8-------
Students w/ disabilities14---14-------
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.------------
Asian1---1-------
Afr. Amer./Black------------
Hispanic/Latino1---1-------
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.1---1-------
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.------------
White9090100Yes9090100Yes----

NOTE: In 2016, assessment participation was calculated two ways: First, the 2016 participation rate for each subgroup in each subject area test was calculated. If the actual 2016 participation rate was lower than 95 percent for any group in any subject, that rate was compared to the average of the most recent two years of assessment participation data for that group and subject. The higher of the two resulting rates was factored into the assignment of the school or district's 2016 accountability and assistance level.

School and District Profiles