Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Impact Prep at Chestnut

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Chestnut Accelerated Middle School (South)

Organization Information

District:

Springfield (02810000)

School type:

Middle School

School:

Chestnut Accelerated Middle School (South) (02810366)

Grades served:

06,07,08

Region:

Commissioner's Districts

Title I status:

Title I School (SW)

Accountability and Assistance Level:

Level 4

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		65.8	52.5	65.5	13.0	80.1	82.9	4	244	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		63.9	51.6	64.9	13.3	78.9	82.0	6	232	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		52.4	52.4	66.0	13.6	56.4	76.2	5	217	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		45.0	48.8	55.6	6.8	67.9	72.5	10	85	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		45.2	33.1	44.7	11.6	68.0	72.6	5	47	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	19	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		61.0	52.2	64.2	12.0	77.3	80.5	7	219	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	5	-	-

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		47.1	36.4	44.3	7.9	69.1	73.6	3	237	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		44.9	35.6	43.3	7.7	67.9	72.5	3	226	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		36.6	36.6	43.8	7.2	41.9	68.3	3	211	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		30.4	35.2	38.7	3.5	59.4	65.2	6	84	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		33.0	25.0	23.4	-1.6	60.9	66.5	1	46	25	No Change
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	18	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		40.7	36.0	43.5	7.5	65.4	70.4	4	216	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-

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		41.8	29.8	37.7	7.9	66.1	70.9	3	71	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		39.4	29.4	36.4	7.0	64.7	69.7	3	68	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		30.8	30.8	37.3	6.5	36.6	65.4	3	63	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		26.3	24.2	27.4	3.2	57.0	63.2	9	21	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	13	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	4	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		38.1	29.1	38.1	9.0	63.9	69.1	9	65	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-

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	0.5	0.4	244	0	38.7	26.2	244	25
High needs	0.5	0.4	232	0	40.2	26.7	232	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	0.6	0.5	217	0	39.4	26.3	217	25
EL and Former EL	0.0	0.0	85	0	45.0	37.6	85	25
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	47	0	74.2	53.2	47	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	19	-	-	-	19	-
Hispanic/Latino	0.5	0.5	219	0	39.0	29.2	219	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	5	-	-	-	5	-

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	0.0	0.4	237	25	66.2	52.3	237	25
High needs	0.0	0.4	226	25	66.5	54.0	226	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	0.0	0.5	211	25	64.1	53.6	211	25
EL and Former EL	0.0	0.0	84	0	64.2	59.5	84	0
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	46	0	87.5	89.1	46	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	18	-	-	-	18	-
Hispanic/Latino	0.0	0.5	216	25	66.8	53.2	216	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-

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	0.0	0.0	71	0	76.5	56.3	71	25
High needs	0.0	0.0	68	0	77.4	58.8	68	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	0.0	0.0	63	0	75.0	57.1	63	25
EL and Former EL	0.0	0.0	21	0	87.1	71.4	21	25
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	13	-	-	-	13	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	4	-	-	-	4	-
Hispanic/Latino	0.0	0.0	65	0	78.7	53.8	65	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-

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		23.0	37.5	14.5	51.0	Yes	222	100	Above Target
High needs		23.0	38.0	15.0	51.0	Yes	211	100	Above Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		21.0	38.0	17.0	51.0	Yes	199	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		24.0	42.0	18.0	51.0	Yes	71	100	Above Target
Students w/ disabilities		31.0	34.0	3.0	51.0	No	40	50	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	1	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	18	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		22.0	37.0	15.0	51.0	Yes	198	100	Above Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	5	-	-

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		22.0	27.0	5.0	51.0	No	221	50	Below Target
High needs		22.0	27.0	5.0	51.0	No	211	50	Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		24.5	26.0	1.5	51.0	No	199	50	Below Target
EL and Former EL		28.0	33.0	5.0	51.0	No	73	50	Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		21.0	22.0	1.0	51.0	No	42	50	Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	0	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	17	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		22.0	28.0	6.0	51.0	No	201	50	Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	3	-	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Extra credit for English language proficiency growth About the Data
	2016 SGPA	2016 Target	SGPA N Included	PPI Points
All students	19.0	60.0	53.00	0
High needs	19.0	60.0	53.00	0
EL and Former EL	19.0	60.0	53.00	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	292	291	100	Yes	292	283	97	Yes	94	92	98	Yes
High needs	278	277	100	Yes	278	270	97	Yes	90	88	98	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	259	258	100	Yes	259	251	97	Yes	83	81	98	Yes
EL and Former EL	108	108	100	Yes	108	107	99	Yes	33	32	97	Yes
Students w/ disabilities	57	57	100	Yes	57	56	98	Yes	17	-	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	1	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	26	-	-	-	26	-	-	-	7	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	258	257	100	Yes	258	254	98	Yes	85	83	98	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	7	-	-	-	7	-	-	-	2	-	-	-

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.