Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Central Middle

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Central Middle

Organization Information

District:

Quincy (02430000)

School type:

Middle School

School:

Central Middle (02430315)

Grades served:

06,07,08

Region:

Southeast

Title I status:

Non-Title I School (NT)

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		92.6	93.0	93.2	0.2	95.7	96.3	66	643	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		84.9	84.2	85.8	1.6	91.2	92.5	80	236	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		87.2	87.2	89.2	2.0	88.3	93.6	82	176	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		76.4	72.4	74.6	2.2	86.2	88.2	55	56	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		71.8	68.5	71.9	3.4	83.6	85.9	55	65	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		91.0	92.3	92.5	0.2	94.8	95.5	24	244	50	Improved Below Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	18	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
White		94.2	94.7	94.4	-0.3	96.6	97.1	67	351	25	No Change

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		80.1	84.4	83.1	-1.3	88.4	90.1	65	643	25	No Change
High needs		72.9	72.5	72.9	0.4	84.2	86.5	87	235	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		78.2	78.2	79.3	1.1	80.0	89.1	91	175	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		76.4	68.5	76.8	8.3	86.2	88.2	81	56	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		43.5	46.4	44.6	-1.8	67.0	71.8	31	65	25	No Change
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		88.4	89.8	88.9	-0.9	93.2	94.2	32	244	75	On Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	18	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	14	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
White		78.8	83.4	80.5	-2.9	87.6	89.4	44	351	0	Declined

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		79.5	78.9	80.4	1.5	88.0	89.8	72	216	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		71.9	67.7	68.3	0.6	83.6	86.0	81	71	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		72.2	72.2	73.2	1.0	74.5	86.1	89	56	50	Improved Below Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	17	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		82.6	82.5	84.8	2.3	89.9	91.3	36	74	75	On Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	9	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		80.2	79.8	80.0	0.2	88.5	90.1	61	129	50	Improved Below Target

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	20.3	21.6	643	0	2.6	2.6	643	0
High needs	8.9	15.3	236	25	7.0	6.8	236	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	11.0	18.2	176	25	4.9	5.7	176	0
EL and Former EL	0.0	1.8	56	25	10.2	19.6	56	0
Students w/ disabilities	1.6	6.2	65	25	17.7	9.2	65	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	24.9	25.0	244	0	2.4	4.5	244	0
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	18	-	-	-	18	-
Hispanic/Latino	-	-	14	-	-	-	14	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	13	-	-	-	13	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
White	18.1	19.7	351	0	2.2	1.7	351	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	35.0	38.3	643	0	9.6	11.4	643	0
High needs	24.8	24.3	235	0	21.5	23.4	235	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	29.9	28.6	175	0	14.6	16.0	175	0
EL and Former EL	16.0	17.9	56	25	20.0	14.3	56	25
Students w/ disabilities	1.6	3.1	65	25	46.8	55.4	65	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	50.7	49.2	244	0	5.4	7.8	244	0
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	18	-	-	-	18	-
Hispanic/Latino	-	-	14	-	-	-	14	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	13	-	-	-	13	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
White	27.9	31.6	351	25	9.5	12.5	351	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	8.9	13.0	216	25	10.4	9.3	216	25
High needs	3.4	5.6	71	25	24.1	19.7	71	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	4.4	5.4	56	25	15.6	16.1	56	0
EL and Former EL	-	-	13	-	-	-	13	-
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	17	-	-	-	17	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	12.0	10.8	74	0	6.0	8.1	74	0
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	9	-	-	-	9	-
Hispanic/Latino	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	8.1	14.0	129	25	9.7	7.8	129	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		45.0	51.0	6.0	51.0	No	621	75	On Target
High needs		47.0	48.5	1.5	51.0	Yes	220	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		47.0	49.5	2.5	51.0	Yes	162	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		50.0	60.0	10.0	51.0	Yes	47	100	Above Target
Students w/ disabilities		47.5	38.5	-9.0	51.0	No	64	25	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		51.5	57.0	5.5	51.0	Yes	232	75	On Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	18	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		-	-	-	51.0	-	14	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	12	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	3	-	-
White		42.0	46.5	4.5	51.0	No	342	50	Below 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	41.0	-5.0	51.0	No	622	50	Below Target
High needs		43.5	40.0	-3.5	51.0	No	220	25	Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		46.0	39.0	-7.0	51.0	Yes	162	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		29.0	49.5	20.5	51.0	Yes	48	100	Above Target
Students w/ disabilities		32.5	37.0	4.5	51.0	No	65	50	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		54.0	45.0	-9.0	51.0	No	233	50	Below Target
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	18	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		-	-	-	51.0	-	14	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	12	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	3	-	-
White		45.5	39.0	-6.5	51.0	No	342	25	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	91.0	60.0	23.00	25
High needs	91.0	60.0	23.00	25
EL and Former EL	91.0	60.0	23.00	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	663	658	99	Yes	664	658	99	Yes	222	220	99	Yes
High needs	251	249	99	Yes	251	247	98	Yes	76	75	99	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	183	182	99	Yes	183	181	99	Yes	57	57	100	Yes
EL and Former EL	68	68	100	Yes	68	67	99	Yes	16	-	-	-
Students w/ disabilities	66	65	98	Yes	66	65	98	Yes	18	-	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	257	256	100	Yes	257	255	99	Yes	77	77	100	Yes
Afr. Amer./Black	19	-	-	-	19	-	-	-	9	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	15	-	-	-	15	-	-	-	4	-	-	-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	13	-	-	-	13	-	-	-	2	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	3	-	-	-	3	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	356	352	99	Yes	356	352	99	Yes	130	129	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.