Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Emily G Wetherbee

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Emily G Wetherbee

Organization Information

District:

Lawrence (01490000)

School type:

Elementary-Middle School

School:

Emily G Wetherbee (01490080)

Grades served:

K,01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08

Region:

Commissioner's Districts

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		77.6	78.0	80.0	2.0	86.9	88.8	42	457	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		76.1	75.8	78.2	2.4	86.1	88.1	62	384	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		76.8	76.8	78.5	1.7	78.7	88.4	63	333	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		66.8	66.2	68.9	2.7	80.6	83.4	48	155	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		63.5	71.4	71.0	-0.4	78.7	81.8	75	107	25	No Change
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	19	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		76.8	77.1	79.0	1.9	86.5	88.4	57	409	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		79.8	84.0	90.6	6.6	88.2	89.9	56	24	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		66.1	73.1	73.3	0.2	80.2	83.1	43	457	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		65.2	70.0	71.4	1.4	79.7	82.6	63	384	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		70.5	70.5	71.4	0.9	73.0	85.3	62	333	50	Improved Below Target
EL and Former EL		63.1	65.6	65.2	-0.4	78.5	81.6	53	155	25	No Change
Students w/ disabilities		54.2	62.7	66.1	3.4	73.3	77.1	82	107	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	19	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		64.7	72.7	72.9	0.2	79.4	82.4	61	409	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		71.0	70.0	72.9	2.9	83.1	85.5	17	24	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		56.1	72.3	69.9	-2.4	74.4	78.1	61	152	25	No Change
High needs		55.6	70.5	67.4	-3.1	74.1	77.8	77	128	0	Declined
Econ. Disadvantaged		70.8	70.8	67.8	-3.0	73.2	85.4	88	118	0	Declined
EL and Former EL		49.1	61.4	55.6	-5.8	70.3	74.6	76	40	0	Declined
Students w/ disabilities		58.6	63.9	62.5	-1.4	75.9	79.3	79	38	25	No Change
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	8	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		55.6	70.9	69.7	-1.2	74.1	77.8	87	136	25	No Change
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-

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	8.1	5.5	457	0	12.9	10.5	457	25
High needs	6.7	4.9	384	0	14.7	11.7	384	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	6.8	5.7	333	0	14.2	12.3	333	25
EL and Former EL	0.7	0.0	155	0	24.5	17.4	155	25
Students w/ disabilities	1.0	0.9	107	0	18.4	18.7	107	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	19	-	-	-	19	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Hispanic/Latino	6.8	4.6	409	0	13.6	11.2	409	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	16.0	8.3	24	0	8.0	4.2	24	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	14.1	13.6	457	0	20.0	19.0	457	0
High needs	9.1	11.2	384	25	22.8	21.1	384	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	9.2	12.0	333	25	22.0	21.3	333	0
EL and Former EL	6.1	7.1	155	25	28.6	28.4	155	0
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	1.9	107	25	35.3	29.0	107	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	19	-	-	-	19	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Hispanic/Latino	12.4	11.5	409	0	20.3	19.3	409	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	8.0	8.3	24	0	24.0	16.7	24	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	5.0	2.0	152	0	16.5	17.1	152	0
High needs	5.1	1.6	128	0	19.7	19.5	128	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	4.6	1.7	118	0	20.4	17.8	118	25
EL and Former EL	9.1	0.0	40	0	36.4	37.5	40	0
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	38	0	27.8	31.6	38	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	8	-	-	-	8	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Hispanic/Latino	4.9	0.7	136	0	18.0	17.6	136	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-

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		56.0	53.0	-3.0	51.0	No	336	75	On Target
High needs		57.0	54.0	-3.0	51.0	No	276	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		57.0	53.0	-4.0	51.0	No	246	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		67.0	59.0	-8.0	51.0	No	110	75	On Target
Students w/ disabilities		47.0	47.0	0.0	51.0	No	57	50	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	16	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	2	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		55.0	53.0	-2.0	51.0	No	301	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	16	-	-

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		54.0	43.0	-11.0	51.0	No	337	50	Below Target
High needs		49.5	46.0	-3.5	51.0	No	277	50	Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		47.0	43.0	-4.0	51.0	No	247	50	Below Target
EL and Former EL		48.0	51.0	3.0	51.0	No	111	75	On Target
Students w/ disabilities		29.0	51.0	22.0	51.0	No	57	100	Above Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	16	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	2	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		54.0	46.0	-8.0	51.0	No	302	50	Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	16	-	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Extra credit for English language proficiency growth About the Data
	2016 SGPA	2016 Target	SGPA N Included	PPI Points
All students	80.0	60.0	122.00	25
High needs	80.0	60.0	122.00	25
EL and Former EL	80.0	60.0	122.00	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	521	519	100	Yes	521	519	100	Yes	165	165	100	Yes
High needs	448	446	100	Yes	448	446	100	Yes	141	141	100	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	389	387	99	Yes	389	387	99	Yes	130	130	100	Yes
EL and Former EL	199	198	99	Yes	199	198	99	Yes	47	47	100	Yes
Students w/ disabilities	125	125	100	Yes	125	125	100	Yes	42	42	100	Yes
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	21	-	-	-	21	-	-	-	9	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	2	-	-	-	2	-	-	-	1	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	470	468	100	Yes	470	468	100	Yes	148	148	100	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	3	-	-	-	3	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	25	25	100	Yes	25	25	100	Yes	7	-	-	-

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.