Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Milton Fuller Roberts

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Milton Fuller Roberts

Organization Information

District:

Medford (01760000)

School type:

Elementary School

School:

Milton Fuller Roberts (01760150)

Grades served:

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

Region:

Greater Boston

Title I status:

Title I School (TA)

Accountability and Assistance Level:

Level 2

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		80.1	74.8	79.0	4.2	88.4	90.1	25	224	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		70.9	65.0	68.1	3.1	83.0	85.5	19	113	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		68.8	68.8	67.6	-1.2	71.4	84.4	16	71	25	No Change
EL and Former EL		58.6	49.3	56.9	7.6	75.9	79.3	11	36	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		60.0	52.6	59.9	7.3	76.7	80.0	36	38	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		89.3	76.8	87.9	11.1	93.8	94.7	31	29	50	Improved Below Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	18	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		69.0	81.7	68.3	-13.4	81.9	84.5	31	26	0	Declined
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		83.8	75.0	81.8	6.8	90.6	91.9	18	137	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		75.1	66.6	73.2	6.6	85.5	87.6	12	223	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		67.6	57.8	64.3	6.5	81.1	83.8	12	112	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		58.4	58.4	64.9	6.5	61.9	79.2	12	69	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		55.5	41.2	56.9	15.7	74.0	77.8	8	36	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		63.3	52.6	50.0	-2.6	78.6	81.7	14	38	0	Declined
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		85.7	71.4	83.6	12.2	91.7	92.9	10	29	50	Improved Below Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	18	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		67.0	66.3	67.3	1.0	80.8	83.5	28	26	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		78.5	68.1	74.6	6.5	87.5	89.3	7	137	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		70.0	71.2	64.0	-7.2	82.5	85.0	17	75	0	Declined
High needs		59.7	67.9	45.0	-22.9	76.5	79.9	5	30	0	Declined
Econ. Disadvantaged		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	16	-	-
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	9	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	15	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	8	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	8	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		70.2	73.6	70.4	-3.2	82.6	85.1	10	49	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	4.8	8.0	224	25	14.9	12.9	224	25
High needs	1.5	1.8	113	25	23.0	22.1	113	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	2.2	2.8	71	25	17.4	19.7	71	0
EL and Former EL	0.0	0.0	36	0	35.3	38.9	36	0
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	38	0	41.7	36.8	38	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	3.6	13.8	29	25	17.9	3.4	29	25
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	18	-	-	-	18	-
Hispanic/Latino	3.8	0.0	26	0	3.8	15.4	26	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	14	-	-	-	14	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	5.7	8.8	137	25	15.1	11.7	137	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	10.8	17.0	223	25	22.5	16.1	223	25
High needs	5.9	12.5	112	25	34.8	25.9	112	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	3.3	14.5	69	25	31.5	24.6	69	25
EL and Former EL	2.9	8.3	36	25	61.8	33.3	36	25
Students w/ disabilities	8.3	2.6	38	0	43.8	50.0	38	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	21.4	20.7	29	0	21.4	6.9	29	25
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	18	-	-	-	18	-
Hispanic/Latino	3.8	11.5	26	25	19.2	19.2	26	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	13	-	-	-	13	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	11.9	18.2	137	25	20.1	13.9	137	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	7.6	8.0	75	0	13.9	20.0	75	0
High needs	6.5	0.0	30	0	19.6	40.0	30	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	-	-	16	-	-	-	16	-
EL and Former EL	-	-	9	-	-	-	9	-
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	15	-	-	-	15	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	8	-	-	-	8	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	8	-	-	-	8	-
Hispanic/Latino	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	10.9	8.2	49	0	12.7	12.2	49	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		50.0	53.5	3.5	51.0	Yes	146	75	On Target
High needs		47.5	50.5	3.0	51.0	No	66	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		45.5	30.5	-15.0	51.0	No	40	25	Below Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	15	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		48.0	53.5	5.5	51.0	Yes	28	75	On Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	17	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	12	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		-	-	-	51.0	-	14	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	8	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		45.0	54.0	9.0	51.0	Yes	95	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		46.0	54.5	8.5	51.0	Yes	146	75	On Target
High needs		45.0	46.5	1.5	51.0	Yes	66	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		40.0	44.5	4.5	51.0	Yes	40	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	15	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		38.0	34.0	-4.0	51.0	No	28	25	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	17	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	12	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		-	-	-	51.0	-	14	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	8	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		45.0	52.0	7.0	51.0	Yes	95	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	57.5	60.0	50.00	0
High needs	57.5	60.0	50.00	0
EL and Former EL	57.5	60.0	50.00	0

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	251	249	99	Yes	256	253	99	Yes	87	86	99	Yes
High needs	136	134	99	Yes	139	136	98	Yes	39	38	97	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	84	83	99	Yes	86	83	97	Yes	21	-	-	-
EL and Former EL	54	54	100	Yes	55	55	100	Yes	14	-	-	-
Students w/ disabilities	40	39	98	Yes	40	39	98	Yes	16	-	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	33	33	100	Yes	34	34	100	Yes	9	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	19	-	-	-	21	-	-	-	10	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	33	32	97	Yes	33	32	97	Yes	9	-	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	14	-	-	-	14	-	-	-	3	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	151	150	99	Yes	151	150	99	Yes	55	54	98	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.