Massachusetts School and District Profiles

White Brook Middle School

Districts
Schools

2016

This organization is currently closed.

2016 Accountability Data - White Brook Middle School

Organization Information

District:

Easthampton (00860000)

School type:

Middle School

School:

White Brook Middle School (00860305)

Grades served:

05,06,07,08

Region:

Berkshires +

Title I status:

Title I School (TA)

Accountability and Assistance Level:

Level 3

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		85.9	84.4	85.8	1.4	91.8	93.0	30	438	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		75.7	74.8	75.5	0.7	85.8	87.9	28	184	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		79.8	79.8	79.3	-0.5	81.5	89.9	29	128	25	No Change
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		57.7	57.1	61.5	4.4	75.3	78.9	27	91	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	16	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	9	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		76.6	84.4	80.2	-4.2	86.4	88.3	42	48	0	Declined
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		87.1	84.4	86.5	2.1	92.5	93.6	20	358	50	Improved Below 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		71.3	67.6	72.0	4.4	83.3	85.7	27	435	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		57.9	54.8	55.8	1.0	75.4	79.0	15	184	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		60.1	60.1	62.5	2.4	63.4	80.1	28	128	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		38.4	37.4	35.7	-1.7	64.1	69.2	8	91	25	No Change
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	16	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	9	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		55.5	65.3	66.7	1.4	74.0	77.8	55	48	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		72.1	68.3	72.5	4.2	83.7	86.1	13	355	50	Improved Below 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		75.8	64.1	68.0	3.9	85.9	87.9	28	208	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		64.3	55.6	54.0	-1.6	79.2	82.2	21	81	25	No Change
Econ. Disadvantaged		59.3	59.3	58.6	-0.7	62.7	79.7	32	58	25	No Change
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		53.9	42.9	39.5	-3.4	73.1	77.0	15	38	0	Declined
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	8	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	5	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		65.0	59.7	54.6	-5.1	76.7	82.5	42	27	0	Declined
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		77.9	65.5	70.5	5.0	87.1	89.0	18	167	50	Improved Below 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	7.5	8.2	438	0	8.8	6.4	438	25
High needs	5.0	2.2	184	0	15.0	13.0	184	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	6.8	3.1	128	0	11.6	10.9	128	0
EL and Former EL	-	-	14	-	-	-	14	-
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	91	0	30.8	24.2	91	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	16	-	-	-	16	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	9	-	-	-	9	-
Hispanic/Latino	6.7	4.2	48	0	6.7	10.4	48	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	7.6	8.7	358	25	8.9	6.1	358	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	13.7	14.9	435	0	22.8	22.8	435	0
High needs	3.0	6.0	184	25	37.9	41.8	184	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	4.2	7.0	128	25	30.6	35.2	128	0
EL and Former EL	-	-	14	-	-	-	14	-
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	2.2	91	25	60.4	68.1	91	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	16	-	-	-	16	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	9	-	-	-	9	-
Hispanic/Latino	13.6	10.4	48	0	22.7	31.3	48	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	13.6	15.5	355	25	22.5	22.5	355	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	2.2	4.3	208	25	20.2	17.8	208	25
High needs	1.7	0.0	81	0	32.5	38.3	81	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	2.3	0.0	58	0	24.4	31.0	58	0
EL and Former EL	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	38	0	57.1	63.2	38	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	8	-	-	-	8	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	5	-	-	-	5	-
Hispanic/Latino	0.0	0.0	27	0	25.8	33.3	27	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	2.3	5.4	167	25	18.7	15.0	167	25

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		52.0	45.5	-6.5	51.0	No	424	50	Below Target
High needs		52.0	43.0	-9.0	51.0	No	175	50	Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		48.0	40.0	-8.0	51.0	No	125	25	Below Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	13	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		52.5	45.0	-7.5	51.0	No	83	50	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	15	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	9	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		53.0	48.0	-5.0	51.0	No	45	50	Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	7	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		52.0	44.0	-8.0	51.0	No	348	50	Below 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		35.0	41.0	6.0	51.0	Yes	418	75	On Target
High needs		37.0	39.0	2.0	51.0	No	173	50	Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		37.0	38.0	1.0	51.0	Yes	123	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	13	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		38.0	33.0	-5.0	51.0	No	83	25	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	15	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	9	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		63.0	47.0	-16.0	51.0	Yes	44	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	6	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		33.0	40.5	7.5	51.0	Yes	344	75	On 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	2.00	-
High needs	-	60.0	2.00	-
EL and Former EL	-	60.0	2.00	-

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	468	456	97	Yes	468	453	97	Yes	219	214	98	Yes
High needs	200	194	97	Yes	200	194	97	Yes	89	84	96	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	139	137	99	Yes	139	137	99	Yes	61	60	98	Yes
EL and Former EL	14	-	-	-	14	-	-	-	3	-	-	-
Students w/ disabilities	100	95	95	Yes	100	95	95	Yes	45	40	94	No
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	16	-	-	-	16	-	-	-	8	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	9	-	-	-	9	-	-	-	5	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	52	51	98	Yes	52	51	98	Yes	27	27	100	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	9	-	-	-	9	-	-	-	2	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	382	371	97	Yes	382	368	96	Yes	177	172	97	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.