Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Ashland Middle

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Ashland Middle

Organization Information

District:

Ashland (00140000)

School type:

Middle School

School:

Ashland Middle (00140405)

Grades served:

06,07,08

Region:

Greater Boston

Title I status:

Title I School (TA)

Accountability and Assistance Level:

Level 1

Summary > 2016

2016 English Language Arts Proficiency Gap Narrowing About the Data
	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		94.9	94.1	96.4	2.3	97.0	97.5	89	590	75	On Target
High needs		83.9	83.1	89.0	5.9	90.6	92.0	89	173	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		90.3	90.3	92.0	1.7	91.1	95.2	90	100	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	34	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		81.9	73.9	80.8	6.9	89.4	91.0	82	86	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Asian		100.0	98.8	100.0	1.2	100.0	100.0	97	63	100	Above Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		86.7	84.2	89.2	5.0	92.2	93.4	80	72	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	16	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		95.4	95.4	96.9	1.5	97.3	97.7	88	423	100	Above Target

Summary > 2016

2016 Mathematics Proficiency Gap Narrowing About the Data
	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		84.9	87.3	88.8	1.5	91.2	92.5	84	590	75	On Target
High needs		62.9	66.8	69.8	3.0	78.4	81.5	79	173	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		76.9	76.9	76.5	-0.4	78.8	88.5	82	100	25	No Change
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	34	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		56.7	53.5	54.1	0.6	74.7	78.4	64	86	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Asian		99.0	98.8	98.8	0.0	99.4	99.5	94	63	100	Above Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		58.9	69.9	72.9	3.0	76.0	79.5	73	72	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	16	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		86.8	89.5	90.1	0.6	92.3	93.4	85	423	75	On Target

Summary > 2016

2016 Science Proficiency Gap Narrowing About the Data
	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		79.0	80.4	81.1	0.7	87.8	89.5	75	193	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		63.2	60.9	59.2	-1.7	78.5	81.6	41	49	25	No Change
Econ. Disadvantaged		67.0	-	-	-	-	83.5	-	30	-	-
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	5	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		63.9	54.6	48.3	-6.3	78.9	82.0	34	30	0	Declined
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	20	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	6	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	29	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	4	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		78.8	82.5	84.1	1.6	87.6	89.4	78	132	75	On Target

Summary > 2016

2016 English Language Arts Extra Credit About the Data
	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	20.9	36.4	590	25	2.5	1.7	590	25
High needs	8.4	15.0	173	25	7.8	5.8	173	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	14.3	18.0	100	25	3.9	5.0	100	0
EL and Former EL	-	-	34	-	-	-	34	-
Students w/ disabilities	3.4	9.3	86	25	13.8	11.6	86	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Asian	44.2	61.9	63	25	0.0	0.0	63	25
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	14	-	-	-	14	-
Hispanic/Latino	4.6	13.9	72	25	7.7	5.6	72	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	16	-	-	-	16	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	21.8	36.9	423	25	2.2	1.4	423	25

Summary > 2016

2016 Mathematics Extra Credit About the Data
	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	36.2	49.0	590	25	8.6	8.6	590	0
High needs	13.1	23.1	173	25	27.5	26.0	173	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	18.2	26.0	100	25	18.2	19.0	100	0
EL and Former EL	-	-	34	-	-	-	34	-
Students w/ disabilities	7.0	10.5	86	25	39.5	40.7	86	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Asian	74.4	85.7	63	25	0.0	0.0	63	25
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	14	-	-	-	14	-
Hispanic/Latino	7.8	22.2	72	25	28.1	25.0	72	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	16	-	-	-	16	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	37.6	49.2	423	25	5.9	6.9	423	0

Summary > 2016

2016 Science Extra Credit About the Data
	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	3.0	13.5	193	25	7.1	8.8	193	0
High needs	0.0	2.0	49	25	26.1	28.6	49	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	-	-	30	-	-	-	30	-
EL and Former EL	-	-	5	-	-	-	5	-
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	30	0	33.3	43.3	30	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Asian	-	-	20	-	-	-	20	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	6	-	-	-	6	-
Hispanic/Latino	-	-	29	-	-	-	29	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	4	-	-	-	4	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	3.7	14.4	132	25	5.1	5.3	132	0

Summary > 2016

2016 English Language Arts Growth About the Data
	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		69.0	78.0	9.0	51.0	Yes	581	100	Above Target
High needs		64.0	72.0	8.0	51.0	Yes	168	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		70.0	69.5	-0.5	51.0	Yes	98	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	31	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		52.0	72.0	20.0	51.0	Yes	84	100	Above Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	2	-	-
Asian		69.0	81.0	12.0	51.0	Yes	60	100	Above Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	14	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		68.5	72.5	4.0	51.0	Yes	70	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	16	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		70.0	78.0	8.0	51.0	Yes	419	100	Above Target

Summary > 2016

2016 Mathematics Growth About the Data
	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		65.0	79.0	14.0	51.0	Yes	581	100	Above Target
High needs		59.0	69.0	10.0	51.0	No	169	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		61.0	70.0	9.0	51.0	No	99	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	32	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		52.0	61.0	9.0	51.0	No	84	100	Above Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	2	-	-
Asian		74.0	90.5	16.5	51.0	No	60	100	Above Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	14	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		65.0	67.0	2.0	51.0	No	69	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	16	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		64.0	79.5	15.5	51.0	Yes	420	100	Above Target

Summary > 2016

2016 Extra credit for English language proficiency growth About the Data
	2016 SGPA	2016 Target	SGPA N Included	PPI Points
All students	-	60.0	6.00	-
High needs	-	60.0	6.00	-
EL and Former EL	-	60.0	6.00	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Assessment Participation About the Data
	English Language Arts				Mathematics				Science
	Enrolled	Assessed	%	Met Target (95%)	Enrolled	Assessed	%	Met Target (95%)	Enrolled	Assessed	%	Met Target (95%)
All students	610	606	99	Yes	610	606	99	Yes	201	199	99	Yes
High needs	186	185	99	Yes	186	185	99	Yes	54	53	98	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	111	110	99	Yes	111	110	99	Yes	35	34	97	Yes
EL and Former EL	43	43	100	Yes	43	43	100	Yes	8	-	-	-
Students w/ disabilities	87	87	100	Yes	87	87	100	Yes	31	31	100	Yes
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	2	-	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-	-	-
Asian	64	64	100	Yes	64	64	100	Yes	20	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	15	-	-	-	15	-	-	-	6	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	80	80	100	Yes	80	80	100	Yes	31	31	100	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	18	-	-	-	18	-	-	-	5	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	431	427	99	Yes	431	427	99	Yes	137	135	99	Yes

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.