Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Dr Paul Nettle

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Dr Paul Nettle

Organization Information

District:

Haverhill (01280000)

School type:

Middle School

School:

Dr Paul Nettle (01280050)

Grades served:

05,06,07,08

Region:

Northeast

Title I status:

Title I School (SW)

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		72.6	78.2	79.2	1.0	84.0	86.3	12	464	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		64.0	74.7	74.2	-0.5	79.0	82.0	21	304	25	No Change
Econ. Disadvantaged		75.0	75.0	75.7	0.7	77.1	87.5	17	229	50	Improved Below Target
EL and Former EL		47.5	65.2	70.3	5.1	69.4	73.8	45	53	75	On Target
Students w/ disabilities		54.6	73.4	72.7	-0.7	73.5	77.3	59	142	75	On Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	19	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		61.9	75.2	76.1	0.9	77.8	81.0	31	162	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		77.7	79.6	81.4	1.8	87.0	88.9	6	273	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		60.0	73.2	73.7	0.5	76.7	80.0	32	462	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		49.4	68.4	68.2	-0.2	70.5	74.7	71	302	25	No Change
Econ. Disadvantaged		68.0	68.0	69.4	1.4	70.7	84.0	56	228	50	Improved Below Target
EL and Former EL		35.9	64.7	64.2	-0.5	62.6	68.0	64	53	100	Above Target
Students w/ disabilities		42.3	68.2	64.8	-3.4	66.3	71.2	87	140	0	Declined
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	19	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		46.3	68.1	69.1	1.0	68.7	73.2	62	162	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		66.2	75.7	76.7	1.0	80.3	83.1	27	271	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		57.6	69.4	60.3	-9.1	75.3	78.8	17	223	0	Declined
High needs		49.1	65.1	56.2	-8.9	70.3	74.6	27	145	0	Declined
Econ. Disadvantaged		65.9	65.9	53.7	-12.2	68.7	83.0	22	107	0	Declined
EL and Former EL		32.7	61.5	59.1	-2.4	60.7	66.4	86	22	25	No Change
Students w/ disabilities		47.5	66.8	61.9	-4.9	69.4	73.8	84	63	0	Declined
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	8	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		42.7	60.7	53.9	-6.8	66.6	71.4	40	77	0	Declined
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		66.0	73.6	63.6	-10.0	80.2	83.0	7	132	0	Declined

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	2.6	3.4	464	25	11.3	12.9	464	0
High needs	0.3	1.3	304	25	13.5	16.4	304	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	0.4	1.7	229	25	12.7	14.4	229	0
EL and Former EL	0.0	0.0	53	0	21.6	20.8	53	0
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	142	0	18.6	20.4	142	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	19	-	-	-	19	-
Hispanic/Latino	0.6	0.0	162	0	12.9	13.6	162	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	3.8	4.8	273	25	10.8	12.5	273	0

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	13.3	16.0	462	25	18.9	20.1	462	0
High needs	5.9	8.3	302	25	22.4	25.2	302	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	7.6	10.1	228	25	22.0	24.6	228	0
EL and Former EL	2.0	3.8	53	25	19.6	26.4	53	0
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.7	140	25	26.4	33.6	140	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	19	-	-	-	19	-
Hispanic/Latino	7.7	8.6	162	25	21.3	24.7	162	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	15.4	18.8	271	25	18.2	16.6	271	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	2.7	223	0	16.4	30.5	223	0
High needs	1.6	0.7	145	0	21.8	37.9	145	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	2.1	0.9	107	0	20.8	39.3	107	0
EL and Former EL	0.0	0.0	22	0	19.2	27.3	22	0
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	63	0	25.5	41.3	63	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	8	-	-	-	8	-
Hispanic/Latino	0.0	0.0	77	0	22.9	40.3	77	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	4.0	3.8	132	0	13.7	25.8	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		30.0	31.0	1.0	51.0	Yes	369	75	On Target
High needs		30.0	26.5	-3.5	51.0	No	212	0	Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		31.0	29.0	-2.0	51.0	Yes	166	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		30.0	36.0	6.0	51.0	Yes	36	75	On Target
Students w/ disabilities		19.0	19.5	0.5	51.0	No	58	50	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	6	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	15	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		30.0	31.0	1.0	51.0	No	119	50	Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		31.0	31.0	0.0	51.0	Yes	226	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		47.0	45.0	-2.0	51.0	No	364	50	Below Target
High needs		45.0	46.0	1.0	51.0	No	209	50	Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		45.0	50.0	5.0	51.0	No	165	50	Below Target
EL and Former EL		48.5	32.5	-16.0	51.0	No	36	25	Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		38.0	42.0	4.0	51.0	No	56	50	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	6	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	15	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		49.5	45.0	-4.5	51.0	Yes	119	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		45.0	45.0	0.0	51.0	No	221	50	Below 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	69.0	60.0	21.00	25
High needs	69.0	60.0	21.00	25
EL and Former EL	69.0	60.0	21.00	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	494	485	98	Yes	494	485	98	Yes	242	239	99	Yes
High needs	325	319	98	Yes	325	319	98	Yes	159	158	99	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	246	242	98	Yes	246	242	98	Yes	119	118	99	Yes
EL and Former EL	60	55	94	No	60	58	97	Yes	27	26	96	Yes
Students w/ disabilities	151	147	97	Yes	151	147	97	Yes	67	67	100	Yes
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	9	-	-	-	9	-	-	-	5	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	19	-	-	-	19	-	-	-	8	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	180	175	97	Yes	180	178	99	Yes	88	87	99	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	3	-	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	282	279	99	Yes	282	276	98	Yes	138	137	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.