Lynn Public School District Classified as Making Substantial Progress Toward State Targets

Last year, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) revised its accountability and assistance system to consider additional metrics aside from standardized test scores.

Source: Once Page Overview of Accountability Indicators


As previously noted, schools are no longer classified in Levels 1 through 5 and are instead classified according to the categories below:

Source: One Page Summary of Massachusetts' Accountability System

In 2018, Lynn as a district was classified as 'Not Requiring Assistance or Intervention' and the same was true in 2019. Further, the reason for this year's classification was 'Substantial Progress Towards Targets.' The percentage assigned to Lynn  in 2019 associated with this classification based on the 0 to 100 scale was 64%. When weighted along with last year's percentage, the cumulative target percentage was 56%. 

Source: 2019 Official Accountability Report - Lynn

In looking at the 'points' received for the indicators above, Lynn received 71% of possible points for non-high school grades (78% for the lowest performing students at this grade level) and 47% for high school grades (50% for the lowest performing students). At the high school level, Lynn received 4 out of 4 points for the chronic absenteeism indicator but 0 out of 4 points for the advanced coursework completion indicator.

At the individual school level, three-quarters of the schools in Lynn were considered as either making 'substantial progress toward targets' or 'meeting or exceeding targets.' Three schools were classified as 'Requiring Assistance or Intervention:' Lynn Classical High School, Thurgood Marshall Middle School and Washington Elementary School. 

Lynn Rolls Out New Attendance Initiative - A Look at the Data

In the October 1st edition of the Daily Item, Gayla Cawley reported that the Lynn Public School District is rolling out a new K - 12 attendance plan called "Every Student, Every Day." Part of this plan includes "studying data to determine which students have high absentee rates and working with those families, and reaching out to community partners for support."

The most recent data from the 2016-2017 school year indicates that the average number of days absent for Lynn students was 10.5 and that 19.2% of students were deemed chronically absent (defined as missing 18 or more school days). Nearly 40% of students missed 10 or more school days that year. 

Attendance rates did vary by school. Drewicz and Aborn, for example, each reported their average number of absences to be about 6 while Fecteau-Leary reported 29 absences as the average. 

School	Attendance Rate	Avg. # of Absences	Absent 10 or More Days	Chronically Absent (10% or More)
Drewicz Elementary	96.4%	6	23.5%	6.2%
Aborn	96.4%	6.2	21%	4%
Breed Middle School	94.2%	9.9	38.6%	17.4%
Brickett Elementary	94.9%	8.7	35%	11.9%
Shoemaker	94.9%	9	36.8%	10.4%
Classical High	91.7%	14	54.6%	32%
Cobbet Elementary	95.8%	7.2	26.5%	8.2%
Harrington	94.4%	9.4	35.6%	18.3%
Early Childhood Center	91.2%	14.3	51.2%	30.1%
Sisson	95.3%	8.3	31.6%	8.8%
Fecteau-Leary Junior/Senior High School	78.6%	29.1	79.3%	72.3%
Hood	95.5%	7.7	31.1%	9.4%
Ingalls	95.5%	7.5	30.6%	10.4%
Callahan	94.6%	9.1	37%	12.9%
Lincoln-Thomson	96%	6.9	24.9%	7.3%
Lynn English High	90.9%	15.1	52.8%	32.7%
Lynn Vocational Technical Institute	93.1%	12	50.4%	22.7%
Lynn Woods	95.9%	7.2	23.8%	6%
Pickering Middle	95%	8.7	34.4%	12.9%
Ford	95.7%	7.4	27.5%	9.8%
Sewell-Anderson	95.2%	8.4	34.8%	10.7%
Thurgood Marshall Mid	94.9%	8.6	32.9%	16%
Tracy	95.5%	7.6	28.5%	13.1%
Washington Elementary School	93.8%	10.2	41.5%	19.4%
Fallon	88.7%	18.9	71.7%	55%
Connery	95.6%	7.6	30.6%	9.1%

As previously reported, Massachusetts's new accountability system takes into consideration a number of factors, one being chronic absenteeism. At the non-high school level, Lynn received 3 points for all students, meaning it met its target; Lynn's 2018 target for chronic absenteeism in the lower grades was 11.7%. The target for the lowest performing students was 11.9% and Lynn reported 13.1% so while it did improve from 2017, it was below the target and the district received 2 points as a result. 

The chronic absenteeism rate at the high school level increased from 2017 to 2018 for students overall as well as for the lowest performing students. Due to this decline, the district received 0 points in each category. 

In addition to working with families directly, the Item also noted that the district "is doing community outreach and awareness and educating community agencies and doctors’ offices about the impact of chronic absenteeism."

All data taken from: www.doe.mass.edu

Lynn Classified 'Not Requiring Assistance/Intervention' Per State's New Accountability System

As of this school year, Massachusetts has introduced a revised accountability and assistance system and will no longer be categorizing schools into Levels 1 through 5. Instead, schools will classified as follows:

Schools without Required Assistance or Intervention (85% of Schools):

Reasons for this classification include:

• Schools of Recognition
• Those 'Meeting Targets'
• Those 'Partially Meeting Targets'

Schools Requiring Assistance or Intervention (15% of Schools):

Reasons for this classification include schools/districts requiring either: 

• Focused/Targeted Support

           or

• Broad/Comprehensive Support

More specifically, the new accountability takes into account indicators not previously factored into the accountability system including chronic absenteeism and advanced coursework completion and will also have an increased focus on "raising the performance of the school's lowest performing students." In addition to the overall classifications referenced above, schools and districts will also be assigned a percentage that combines information about the chosen indicators into a single number between 0 and 100. In order to be classified as "meeting targets" a school or district must have target percentage of 75% or higher.

http://www.doe.mass.edu/accountability/lists-tools.html 

In order to get a better sense of this new accountability system, let's take a look at the Lynn Public School District. In 2018, Lynn's overall classification was 'not requiring assistance or intervention' with the reason being 'partially meeting targets.' The percentage assigned to Lynn associated with this partial meeting of goals based on the 0 to 100 scale was 45%.

As you can see, each of the indicators is given a point total from 0 to 4 based on the reported data compared to their state determined target. Though there is some variation in the 0 to 2 point range depending on the category, schools that receive a 3 were considered 'on target' and those that received a 4 exceeded their target. Further, each category is weighted differently. For example, 'Achievement' at the non-high school grade level for all students is weighted at 60% while it is weighted 40% for all students at the high school level due to the additional secondary indicators (high school completion). Overall, Lynn's non-high school results were weighted at 70% while the high school results were weighted as 30%. 

For Lynn's 2018 MCAS scores, see here and the district's drop out rates, here. 

Most schools within LPS were also classified as 'not requiring assistance or intervention' with the exception of Classical High School, Fecteau-Leary, and Pickering Middle School.

Classical was classified as such because: 

• It is among the lowest performing 10% of schools (at the 8th percentile)
• Low subgroup performance for high needs students
• Low participation rate for English Language Learners and former English Language Learners

Fecteau-Leary required assistance due to its low participation rate among the student body at large and Pickering reported low subgroup performance among Asian students. In terms of meeting targets, Drewicz, Brickett, Callahan, Cobbet, Ford and Lynn Tech were all reported as 'meeting targets.'

KIPP Academy Lynn, a single school district, was also classified as 'partially meeting targets' with a target percentage of 29%.

While there were a number of Massachusetts districts requiring assistance or intervention, most were in the 'Focused/Targeted Support' category; just three districts were in the 'Broad/Comprehensive Support' category (Lawrence, Holyoke, and Southbridge, the state's previously named Level 5 districts). 

Source: www.doe.mass.edu

A Look at those Accountability Levels

Here Worcester School Committee makes some interesting points about schools designated Level 4 according to the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. She writes:

"So, when you line up all of the schools in the state in rank order, and draw a line at the bottom 1/5, that's your Level 3's.

But what makes a Level 4?

Beyond their having to be in Level 3 status, the only other restriction the state law makes on Level 4 and 5 schools is that they can make up no more than 4% of the schools in the state at any one time.

So which schools fall from 3 to 4?

The state, in their explanation of the classification of Level 3 schools says this:

The state’s lowest achieving, least improving Level 3 schools are candidates for classification into Level 4 at the discretion of the Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education. A Level 4 school may be classified into Level 5 by the Commissioner on behalf of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education if it fails to improve; or if district conditions make it unlikely that the school will make significant improvement without a Level 5 designation.

(emphasis added) 
"...at the discretion of the Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education."

Interestingly, although no more than 4% of schools statewide can be categorized as Level 4 at any given time, Massachusetts' Level 4 schools are not necessarily all in the bottom 4% of schools. Let's look at Boston as an example. Below are the schools that fall in the bottom 5% of schools statewide. 

School	Percentile	Accountability & Assistance Level
Mattahunt	1	Level 4
Mildred Avenue K-8	1	Level 3
Henry Grew	2	Level 3
John Winthrop	2	Level 4
Higginson/Lewis K-8	2	Level 3
Madison Park High	2	Level 3
Ellis Mendell	3	Level 3
John P. Holland	3	Level 5
John W. McCormack	3	Level 3
Paul Dever	4	Level 5
Greenwood Leadership Academy	4	Level 4
William Ellery Channing	4	Level 4
King K-8	4	Level 3
Washington Irving	4	Level 3
Jeremiah Burke High	4	Level 4
Dorchester Academy	4	Level 3
Michael J. Perkins	5	Level 3
Gardner Pilot Academy	5	Level 3
Young Achievers	5	Level 3
Timilty Middle	5	Level 3
East Boston High	5	Level 3

Here you can see that Boston has two Level 5 schools, Holland and Dever, that are in the 3rd and 4th percentiles respectively while Mildred Avenue K-8 school is at the 1st percentile and is a Level 3 school. Further Dearborn Middle School, which was not included on the list, is at the 10th percentile and is a Level 4 school. In 2012, Lynn Classical was a Level 3 school despite being at the 28th percentile due to its graduation rate among some of its subgroups. The John Avery Parker School in New Bedford, a school at the 15th percentile, was named Level 5 last year even though it met all of its PPI targets for both the 'High Needs' and 'All Students' groups and had a Student Growth Percentile (SGP) that was above above target. The four schools designated Level 5 by the Commissioner were at the 3rd, 4th, 8th and 15th percentiles. Thus, a school's accountability level might not necessarily mean what we think it means.

In looking at this information more in depth, Novick's conclusion does seem apropos:

"An enormous degree of importance is placed on these standings, however, and the most critical ones, the ones that do the most damage to a school's image, the ones that cause the most angst in and about districts are the ones that are not based simply on a calculation (however flawed those might be). They're chosen.

So when we're making assumptions and drawing conclusions about what the levels mean, let's keep that in mind."