Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Alfred G. Zanetti Montessori Magnet School

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Alfred G. Zanetti Montessori Magnet School

Organization Information

District:

Springfield (02810000)

School type:

Elementary-Middle School

School:

Alfred G. Zanetti Montessori Magnet School (02810095)

Grades served:

PK,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		81.3	87.9	94.1	6.2	89.1	90.7	89	200	100	Above Target
High needs		78.7	82.2	92.3	10.1	87.6	89.4	97	88	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		83.5	83.5	92.7	9.2	84.9	91.8	95	82	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	6	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	11	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		89.1	85.5	92.4	6.9	93.6	94.6	95	56	75	On Target
Hispanic/Latino		77.3	84.9	92.6	7.7	86.8	88.7	96	85	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		77.4	95.7	98.0	2.3	86.8	88.7	97	51	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		74.2	82.2	87.4	5.2	85.0	87.1	82	200	100	Above Target
High needs		72.3	76.0	84.7	8.7	83.8	86.2	94	88	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		77.1	77.1	84.5	7.4	79.0	88.6	92	82	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	6	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	11	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		83.7	82.9	81.7	-1.2	90.5	91.9	90	56	75	On Target
Hispanic/Latino		67.5	76.0	85.3	9.3	81.0	83.8	89	85	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	7	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		76.6	92.9	95.6	2.7	86.4	88.3	92	51	100	Above 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		72.1	81.6	80.3	-1.3	83.7	86.1	74	57	25	No Change
High needs		70.3	74.2	75.9	1.7	82.7	85.2	89	28	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	24	-	-
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	4	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	17	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		65.0	75.0	78.1	3.1	79.6	82.5	93	24	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	15	-	-

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	10.6	17.5	200	25	2.7	0.5	200	25
High needs	4.0	11.4	88	25	5.0	1.1	88	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	4.3	12.2	82	25	5.3	1.2	82	25
EL and Former EL	-	-	6	-	-	-	6	-
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	11	-	-	-	11	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Afr. Amer./Black	2.6	7.1	56	25	0.0	0.0	56	25
Hispanic/Latino	8.2	14.1	85	25	5.1	1.2	85	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	21.7	35.3	51	25	0.0	0.0	51	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	23.9	36.5	200	25	7.4	4.0	200	25
High needs	19.8	26.1	88	25	12.9	5.7	88	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	21.3	26.8	82	25	12.8	4.9	82	25
EL and Former EL	-	-	6	-	-	-	6	-
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	11	-	-	-	11	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Afr. Amer./Black	13.2	19.6	56	25	7.9	8.9	56	0
Hispanic/Latino	17.3	27.1	85	25	10.2	3.5	85	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	7	-	-	-	7	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	41.3	66.7	51	25	2.2	0.0	51	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	11.5	15.8	57	25	8.2	7.0	57	25
High needs	3.0	7.1	28	25	15.2	10.7	28	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	-	-	24	-	-	-	24	-
EL and Former EL	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	4	-	-	-	4	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	17	-	-	-	17	-
Hispanic/Latino	2.8	12.5	24	25	11.1	0.0	24	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	15	-	-	-	15	-

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	68.0	19.5	51.0	Yes	155	100	Above Target
High needs		46.0	69.0	23.0	51.0	Yes	73	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		47.0	68.5	21.5	51.0	Yes	68	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	5	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	51.0	-	9	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		41.0	68.5	27.5	51.0	Yes	48	100	Above Target
Hispanic/Latino		53.0	67.5	14.5	51.0	Yes	60	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	6	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		48.0	72.0	24.0	51.0	Yes	40	100	Above 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		48.5	59.0	10.5	51.0	Yes	155	75	On Target
High needs		51.0	60.0	9.0	51.0	Yes	73	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		52.5	59.5	7.0	51.0	Yes	68	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		-	-	-	51.0	-	5	-	-
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	51.0	-	9	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		67.5	53.0	-14.5	51.0	No	48	75	On Target
Hispanic/Latino		46.0	57.0	11.0	51.0	Yes	60	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	6	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		49.0	64.5	15.5	51.0	Yes	40	100	Above 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	-	60.0	6.00	-
High needs	-	60.0	6.00	-
EL and Former EL	-	60.0	6.00	-

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	201	200	100	Yes	201	200	100	Yes	57	57	100	Yes
High needs	89	88	99	Yes	89	88	99	Yes	28	28	100	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	83	82	99	Yes	83	82	99	Yes	24	-	-	-
EL and Former EL	6	-	-	-	6	-	-	-	1	-	-	-
Students w/ disabilities	11	-	-	-	11	-	-	-	4	-	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	1	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	56	56	100	Yes	56	56	100	Yes	17	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	85	85	100	Yes	85	85	100	Yes	24	24	100	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	7	-	-	-	7	-	-	-	1	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	52	51	98	Yes	52	51	98	Yes	15	-	-	-

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.