Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Guilmette Middle School

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Guilmette Middle School

Organization Information

District:

Lawrence (01490000)

School type:

Middle School

School:

Guilmette Middle School (01490025)

Grades served:

05,06,07,08

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		72.4	72.5	81.1	8.6	83.9	86.2	17	470	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		71.7	70.6	79.6	9.0	83.5	85.9	44	390	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		72.7	72.7	80.7	8.0	75.0	86.4	35	350	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		58.8	54.0	70.2	16.2	76.0	79.4	44	105	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		56.1	51.9	57.7	5.8	74.4	78.1	19	97	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	8	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	9	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		71.4	72.4	81.0	8.6	83.3	85.7	47	439	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	12	-	-

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		54.4	64.4	71.6	7.2	73.4	77.2	25	465	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		54.0	63.2	69.6	6.4	73.2	77.0	78	387	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		64.8	64.8	71.6	6.8	67.7	82.4	65	348	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		43.9	47.8	57.9	10.1	67.3	72.0	48	104	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		40.7	41.9	45.1	3.2	65.4	70.4	33	96	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	9	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		53.2	63.7	70.7	7.0	72.7	76.6	68	435	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	12	-	-

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		47.0	57.8	59.3	1.5	69.1	73.5	16	234	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		46.5	55.2	57.4	2.2	68.8	73.3	33	188	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		56.4	56.4	58.1	1.7	60.0	78.2	31	167	50	Improved Below Target
EL and Former EL		37.7	43.6	47.7	4.1	63.7	68.9	73	65	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		41.8	42.9	38.9	-4.0	66.1	70.9	14	45	0	Declined
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	5	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		45.9	56.7	58.9	2.2	68.4	73.0	60	217	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	9	-	-

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	6.1	7.0	470	25	19.0	11.5	470	25
High needs	4.9	7.2	390	25	21.1	12.3	390	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	5.5	7.7	350	25	18.4	11.7	350	25
EL and Former EL	1.0	1.9	105	25	38.4	21.0	105	25
Students w/ disabilities	1.1	0.0	97	0	40.2	34.0	97	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	8	-	-	-	8	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	9	-	-	-	9	-
Hispanic/Latino	5.9	7.1	439	25	18.8	11.4	439	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	12	-	-	-	12	-

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	14.6	17.2	465	25	30.9	23.2	465	25
High needs	12.5	16.3	387	25	32.2	25.1	387	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	13.5	17.8	348	25	30.7	23.3	348	25
EL and Former EL	4.0	10.6	104	25	49.0	38.5	104	25
Students w/ disabilities	2.2	3.1	96	25	62.4	55.2	96	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	9	-	-	-	9	-
Hispanic/Latino	13.8	17.2	435	25	31.7	23.9	435	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	12	-	-	-	12	-

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	2.6	5.6	234	25	35.3	29.9	234	25
High needs	3.0	5.9	188	25	37.8	32.4	188	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	3.3	6.6	167	25	35.3	31.7	167	25
EL and Former EL	1.7	1.5	65	0	59.3	44.6	65	25
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	45	0	58.7	68.9	45	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	5	-	-	-	5	-
Hispanic/Latino	2.3	5.5	217	25	36.2	30.0	217	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	9	-	-	-	9	-

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		42.0	54.0	12.0	51.0	Yes	437	75	On Target
High needs		41.0	56.0	15.0	51.0	Yes	357	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		40.0	54.0	14.0	51.0	Yes	325	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		42.5	55.0	12.5	51.0	Yes	88	75	On Target
Students w/ disabilities		41.0	51.0	10.0	51.0	Yes	81	75	On Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	8	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	7	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		42.0	53.0	11.0	51.0	Yes	408	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	2	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	12	-	-

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		41.0	49.0	8.0	51.0	Yes	436	75	On Target
High needs		41.0	51.0	10.0	51.0	Yes	358	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		41.0	51.0	10.0	51.0	Yes	326	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		43.0	51.0	8.0	51.0	Yes	89	75	On Target
Students w/ disabilities		33.5	53.0	19.5	51.0	No	81	100	Above Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	7	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	8	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		41.0	48.0	7.0	51.0	Yes	407	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	2	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	12	-	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Extra credit for English language proficiency growth About the Data
	2016 SGPA	2016 Target	SGPA N Included	PPI Points
All students	84.0	60.0	45.00	25
High needs	84.0	60.0	45.00	25
EL and Former EL	84.0	60.0	45.00	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	520	518	100	Yes	520	513	99	Yes	262	261	100	Yes
High needs	437	435	100	Yes	437	432	99	Yes	215	214	100	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	391	389	99	Yes	391	387	99	Yes	191	190	99	Yes
EL and Former EL	139	139	100	Yes	139	138	99	Yes	87	87	100	Yes
Students w/ disabilities	101	99	98	Yes	101	98	97	Yes	48	47	98	Yes
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	9	-	-	-	9	-	-	-	3	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	11	-	-	-	11	-	-	-	6	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	485	484	100	Yes	485	480	99	Yes	242	242	100	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	2	-	-	-	2	-	-	-	1	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	13	-	-	-	13	-	-	-	10	-	-	-

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.