Massachusetts School and District Profiles

William N. DeBerry

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - William N. DeBerry

Organization Information

District:

Springfield (02810000)

School type:

Elementary School

School:

William N. DeBerry (02810045)

Grades served:

K,01,02,03,04,05

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		59.2	70.6	77.4	6.8	76.2	79.6	21	123	75	On Target
High needs		58.9	69.0	76.3	7.3	76.0	79.5	53	112	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		69.9	69.9	76.6	6.7	72.4	85.0	49	109	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		53.6	54.6	76.5	21.9	72.9	76.8	71	34	100	Above Target
Students w/ disabilities		43.8	53.4	78.8	25.4	67.2	71.9	86	33	100	Above Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	20	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		59.4	67.9	77.1	9.2	76.3	79.7	69	96	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	6	-	-

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		61.5	72.0	82.9	10.9	77.5	80.8	38	123	100	Above Target
High needs		61.2	70.3	81.7	11.4	77.4	80.6	74	112	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		71.7	71.7	82.3	10.6	74.1	85.9	75	109	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		52.9	63.0	83.8	20.8	72.5	76.5	78	34	100	Above Target
Students w/ disabilities		53.6	60.3	79.5	19.2	72.9	76.8	87	33	100	Above Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	20	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		57.5	70.2	83.1	12.9	75.2	78.8	82	96	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	6	-	-

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		52.8	59.6	62.5	2.9	72.5	76.4	15	40	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		52.8	57.4	59.5	2.1	72.5	76.4	26	37	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		59.4	59.4	59.5	0.1	62.8	79.7	34	37	50	Improved Below Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	6	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		50.0	55.3	62.1	6.8	70.8	75.0	56	31	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-

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	2.4	4.9	123	25	15.1	8.9	123	25
High needs	2.7	4.5	112	25	16.8	8.9	112	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	2.8	4.6	109	25	16.7	8.3	109	25
EL and Former EL	0.0	5.9	34	25	29.6	11.8	34	25
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	9.1	33	25	34.5	9.1	33	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	20	-	-	-	20	-
Hispanic/Latino	2.1	4.2	96	25	17.9	8.3	96	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	6	-	-	-	6	-

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	11.3	26.0	123	25	14.5	6.5	123	25
High needs	11.6	24.1	112	25	16.1	7.1	112	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	12.1	23.9	109	25	14.0	6.4	109	25
EL and Former EL	3.7	32.4	34	25	25.9	8.8	34	25
Students w/ disabilities	3.4	33.3	33	25	27.6	12.1	33	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	20	-	-	-	20	-
Hispanic/Latino	11.7	26.0	96	25	16.0	6.3	96	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	6	-	-	-	6	-

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	5.0	40	25	28.2	12.5	40	25
High needs	2.9	5.4	37	25	29.4	13.5	37	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	3.1	5.4	37	25	28.1	13.5	37	25
EL and Former EL	-	-	13	-	-	-	13	-
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	13	-	-	-	13	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	6	-	-	-	6	-
Hispanic/Latino	3.0	6.5	31	25	33.3	9.7	31	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-

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		48.5	62.0	13.5	51.0	Yes	75	100	Above Target
High needs		44.0	63.0	19.0	51.0	Yes	69	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		44.0	63.5	19.5	51.0	Yes	68	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	20	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	51.0	-	20	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	10	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		55.5	55.5	0.0	51.0	Yes	60	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	4	-	-

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		29.0	43.0	14.0	51.0	Yes	76	75	On Target
High needs		29.0	43.0	14.0	51.0	Yes	70	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		28.0	43.0	15.0	51.0	Yes	69	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	20	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	51.0	-	20	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	10	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		40.0	43.0	3.0	51.0	Yes	61	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	4	-	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Extra credit for English language proficiency growth About the Data
	2016 SGPA	2016 Target	SGPA N Included	PPI Points
All students	70.0	60.0	36.00	25
High needs	70.0	60.0	36.00	25
EL and Former EL	70.0	60.0	36.00	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	144	144	100	Yes	144	144	100	Yes	46	46	100	Yes
High needs	133	133	100	Yes	133	133	100	Yes	43	43	100	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	128	128	100	Yes	128	128	100	Yes	41	41	100	Yes
EL and Former EL	41	41	100	Yes	41	41	100	Yes	16	-	-	-
Students w/ disabilities	40	40	100	Yes	40	40	100	Yes	16	-	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	1	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	21	-	-	-	21	-	-	-	6	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	116	116	100	Yes	116	116	100	Yes	37	37	100	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	6	-	-	-	6	-	-	-	3	-	-	-

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.