Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Rebecca M Johnson

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Rebecca M Johnson

Organization Information

District:

Springfield (02810000)

School type:

Elementary School

School:

Rebecca M Johnson (02810055)

Grades served:

PK,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		74.3	73.1	76.2	3.1	85.0	87.2	19	289	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		73.7	72.5	76.5	4.0	84.7	86.9	54	256	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		72.7	72.7	76.7	4.0	75.0	86.4	50	243	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		66.7	58.6	72.3	13.7	80.6	83.4	56	56	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		69.0	72.9	72.8	-0.1	81.9	84.5	72	56	25	No Change
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		78.5	76.1	78.5	2.4	87.5	89.3	71	92	50	Improved Below Target
Hispanic/Latino		71.2	72.2	75.0	2.8	83.2	85.6	61	175	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	16	-	-

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		72.5	74.8	83.6	8.8	84.0	86.3	41	286	75	On Target
High needs		72.0	74.8	83.4	8.6	83.7	86.0	81	253	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		74.8	74.8	84.0	9.2	76.9	87.4	81	240	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		70.6	73.7	81.8	8.1	82.9	85.3	74	55	75	On Target
Students w/ disabilities		78.4	77.1	84.5	7.4	87.4	89.2	95	55	75	On Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		71.3	77.5	85.7	8.2	83.3	85.7	92	91	100	Above Target
Hispanic/Latino		71.7	74.3	82.8	8.5	83.5	85.9	81	173	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	16	-	-

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		69.9	74.4	63.5	-10.9	82.4	85.0	16	98	0	Declined
High needs		69.3	73.3	63.1	-10.2	82.1	84.7	35	88	0	Declined
Econ. Disadvantaged		73.8	73.8	63.1	-10.7	76.0	86.9	44	84	0	Declined
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	19	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		77.6	-	-	-	-	88.8	-	23	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		69.1	-	71.8	-9.3	82.0	84.6	90	31	75	On Target
Hispanic/Latino		67.3	75.0	60.2	-14.8	80.9	83.7	51	59	0	Declined
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	6	-	-

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	1.4	4.2	289	25	12.0	10.0	289	25
High needs	0.8	3.5	256	25	12.5	9.0	256	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	0.8	3.7	243	25	12.4	9.5	243	25
EL and Former EL	0.0	1.8	56	25	31.0	10.7	56	25
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	56	0	5.1	8.9	56	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Asian	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Afr. Amer./Black	1.4	9.8	92	25	7.2	10.9	92	0
Hispanic/Latino	1.5	1.1	175	0	13.2	8.6	175	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	16	-	-	-	16	-

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	15.8	21.0	286	25	11.0	4.9	286	25
High needs	15.2	21.7	253	25	10.9	5.5	253	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	15.8	22.9	240	25	10.8	5.8	240	25
EL and Former EL	10.3	12.7	55	25	5.2	5.5	55	0
Students w/ disabilities	8.5	16.4	55	25	10.2	1.8	55	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Asian	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Afr. Amer./Black	18.8	27.5	91	25	11.6	4.4	91	25
Hispanic/Latino	15.3	16.2	173	0	10.3	4.6	173	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	16	-	-	-	16	-

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	2.4	1.0	98	0	8.2	13.3	98	0
High needs	1.4	1.1	88	0	9.7	14.8	88	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	1.5	1.2	84	0	9.2	15.5	84	0
EL and Former EL	-	-	19	-	-	-	19	-
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	23	-	-	-	23	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Afr. Amer./Black	12.1	0.0	31	0	12.1	6.5	31	25
Hispanic/Latino	0.0	1.7	59	25	8.1	15.3	59	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	6	-	-	-	6	-

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		31.0	36.0	5.0	51.0	Yes	188	75	On Target
High needs		30.0	38.5	8.5	51.0	Yes	162	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		30.0	37.0	7.0	51.0	Yes	154	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		18.0	71.0	53.0	51.0	Yes	35	100	Above Target
Students w/ disabilities		31.5	49.0	17.5	51.0	No	35	100	Above Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		41.0	27.0	-14.0	51.0	Yes	55	75	On Target
Hispanic/Latino		27.5	43.0	15.5	51.0	No	118	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	13	-	-

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		31.0	48.0	17.0	51.0	Yes	186	100	Above Target
High needs		30.5	47.0	16.5	51.0	Yes	161	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		32.0	46.0	14.0	51.0	Yes	153	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		32.0	49.5	17.5	51.0	Yes	34	100	Above Target
Students w/ disabilities		33.0	44.5	11.5	51.0	Yes	34	75	On Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		33.0	37.0	4.0	51.0	Yes	55	75	On Target
Hispanic/Latino		32.0	51.0	19.0	51.0	Yes	117	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
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	75.0	60.0	80.00	25
High needs	75.0	60.0	80.00	25
EL and Former EL	75.0	60.0	80.00	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	342	342	100	Yes	341	339	99	Yes	117	117	100	Yes
High needs	305	305	100	Yes	304	302	99	Yes	104	104	100	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	290	290	100	Yes	289	287	99	Yes	100	100	100	Yes
EL and Former EL	70	70	100	Yes	70	69	99	Yes	24	-	-	-
Students w/ disabilities	72	72	100	Yes	72	71	99	Yes	29	29	100	Yes
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	1	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	2	-	-	-	2	-	-	-	1	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	100	100	100	Yes	99	99	100	Yes	35	35	100	Yes
Hispanic/Latino	213	213	100	Yes	213	211	99	Yes	72	72	100	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	5	-	-	-	5	-	-	-	2	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	21	-	-	-	21	-	-	-	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.