Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Letourneau Elementary School

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Letourneau Elementary School

Organization Information

District:

Fall River (00950000)

School type:

Elementary School

School:

Letourneau Elementary School (00950013)

Grades served:

PK,K,01,02,03,04,05

Region:

Commissioner's Districts

Title I status:

Title I School (SW)

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		68.5	63.5	70.6	7.1	81.6	84.3	10	216	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		66.0	59.9	66.5	6.6	80.2	83.0	14	176	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		62.2	62.2	67.0	4.8	65.4	81.1	14	160	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		46.8	41.0	52.9	11.9	69.0	73.4	6	77	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		58.2	40.3	51.7	11.4	75.6	79.1	17	29	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	10	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	20	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		51.9	56.0	59.3	3.3	71.9	76.0	9	78	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		73.5	72.6	79.5	6.9	84.5	86.8	14	100	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		65.9	68.9	70.9	2.0	80.1	83.0	10	218	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		63.4	67.0	67.0	0.0	78.7	81.7	17	178	25	No Change
Econ. Disadvantaged		66.8	66.8	67.1	0.3	69.6	83.4	16	162	50	Improved Below Target
EL and Former EL		49.1	66.0	57.0	-9.0	70.3	74.6	8	79	0	Declined
Students w/ disabilities		58.5	51.6	47.5	-4.1	75.8	79.3	11	30	0	Declined
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	10	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	20	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		47.3	65.4	61.3	-4.1	69.3	73.7	13	80	0	Declined
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		71.5	72.6	79.5	6.9	83.4	85.8	14	100	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		61.4	61.0	58.2	-2.8	77.5	80.7	12	82	0	Declined
High needs		58.3	56.8	56.8	0.0	75.7	79.2	21	70	25	No Change
Econ. Disadvantaged		59.2	59.2	55.2	-4.0	62.6	79.6	27	62	0	Declined
EL and Former EL		33.3	-	-	-	-	66.7	-	37	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	12	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	4	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	8	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		41.7	-	-	-	-	70.9	-	32	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		66.1	68.0	66.9	-1.1	80.2	83.1	6	37	25	No Change

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	5.1	3.7	216	0	26.3	18.1	216	25
High needs	4.3	2.3	176	0	29.7	21.6	176	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	4.9	1.9	160	0	27.2	20.0	160	25
EL and Former EL	1.4	2.6	77	25	51.4	37.7	77	25
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	29	0	54.8	44.8	29	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Asian	-	-	10	-	-	-	10	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	20	-	-	-	20	-
Hispanic/Latino	2.4	2.6	78	0	30.1	32.1	78	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	6.4	6.0	100	0	19.1	8.0	100	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	12.0	16.1	218	25	20.7	20.6	218	0
High needs	10.8	12.4	178	25	22.2	24.2	178	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	11.1	12.3	162	25	21.6	24.7	162	0
EL and Former EL	9.7	10.1	79	0	20.8	35.4	79	0
Students w/ disabilities	3.2	3.3	30	0	45.2	43.3	30	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Asian	-	-	10	-	-	-	10	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	20	-	-	-	20	-
Hispanic/Latino	10.8	8.8	80	0	19.3	33.8	80	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	10.6	21.0	100	25	20.2	11.0	100	25

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	6.1	82	25	27.3	29.3	82	0
High needs	1.8	5.7	70	25	30.9	30.0	70	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	2.2	6.5	62	25	26.1	32.3	62	0
EL and Former EL	-	-	37	-	-	-	37	-
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	12	-	-	-	12	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	4	-	-	-	4	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	8	-	-	-	8	-
Hispanic/Latino	-	-	32	-	-	-	32	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	0.0	5.4	37	25	24.0	16.2	37	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		54.0	60.5	6.5	51.0	No	130	100	Above Target
High needs		52.0	61.0	9.0	51.0	No	109	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		50.0	59.0	9.0	51.0	No	100	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		47.0	62.0	15.0	51.0	Yes	47	100	Above Target
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	51.0	-	15	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	7	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	12	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		43.0	66.5	23.5	51.0	Yes	48	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		53.0	56.0	3.0	51.0	No	60	75	On 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		55.5	62.0	6.5	51.0	No	130	100	Above Target
High needs		57.0	60.0	3.0	51.0	No	109	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		57.0	60.5	3.5	51.0	No	100	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		62.5	41.0	-21.5	51.0	No	47	50	Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	51.0	-	15	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	7	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	12	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		57.0	55.5	-1.5	51.0	No	48	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		49.5	73.0	23.5	51.0	Yes	60	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	65.5	60.0	100.00	25
High needs	65.5	60.0	100.00	25
EL and Former EL	65.5	60.0	100.00	25

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	276	272	99	Yes	278	278	100	Yes	98	98	100	Yes
High needs	235	231	98	Yes	235	235	100	Yes	85	85	100	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	208	206	99	Yes	208	208	100	Yes	74	74	100	Yes
EL and Former EL	128	124	97	Yes	128	128	100	Yes	50	50	100	Yes
Students w/ disabilities	41	40	98	Yes	41	41	100	Yes	17	-	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	1	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	10	-	-	-	10	-	-	-	4	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	25	-	-	-	25	-	-	-	10	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	115	113	98	Yes	115	115	100	Yes	42	42	100	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	8	-	-	-	8	-	-	-	1	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	117	115	98	Yes	117	117	100	Yes	40	40	100	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.