The Impact of Poverty and School Size on the 2015-16 Kansas State Assessment Results

Oct 15, 2026

Analyzes how school enrollment size and the share of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch predict performance on the 2015-16 Kansas Math and English Language Arts assessments. Uses school-level accountability data to model the percent at grade level or above and the percent college/career ready, across multiple student subgroups. Finds that higher poverty rates and larger schools generally correspond to lower achievement, with additional patterns in performance gaps by special education, lunch eligibility, and ELL participation.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages16

Reading Time40 min

AccessFree to download

Summary

Methods

Assessment Results by Poverty and School Size

Table One: Predictive Power of Percent Free/Reduced and School Size

Digging Deeper

Table Two: Predictive Power of Percent Free/Reduced and School Size 2

Achievement Gaps

Table Three: Gaps by Percent Free/Reduced and School Size

Charts

Chart One: Free/Reduced Eligible and Student Enrollment

Chart Two: Free/Reduced Eligible and Percent at Grade Level

Chart Three: Free/Reduced Eligible and College/Career Ready

Chart Four: Student Enrollment and At Grade Level

Chart Five: Student Enrollment and College/Career Ready

Conclusions

Discussion

Student Poverty

School Size

The Impact of Poverty and School Size on the 2015‐16 Kansas State Assessment Results Ted Carter, KASB Research Specialist March 2017 Summary Schools with higher percentages of students in poverty have lower student assessment results on the 2015‐16 Kansas Math and ELA assessments, and larger schools have lower student achievement results than smaller schools. In addition, higher poverty schools are likely to have larger gaps in performance based on special education status and possibly school lunch eligibility when it comes to performing at grade level or above, but can be expected to have smaller gaps in performance based on special education status, lunch eligibility, and ELL program participation when it comes to performing at college/career ready or above. Finally, larger schools are likely to have larger gaps in performance based on lunch eligibility, ELL program participation, and possibly special education stats when it comes to performing at grade level or above, and can be expected to have smaller gaps based on special education status but larger gaps based on lunch status when it comes to performing at college/career ready or above. Contents Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 Assessment Results by Poverty and School Size ........................................................................................... 3 Table One: Predictive Power of Percent Free/Reduced and School Size ................................................ 3 Digging Deeper.............................................................................................................................................. 5 Table Two: Predictive Power of Percent Free/Reduced and School Size 2 ............................................. 5 Achievement Gaps ........................................................................................................................................ 7 Table Three: Gaps by Percent Free/Reduced and School Size ................................................................. 7 Charts ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 Chart One: Free/Reduced Eligible and Student Enrollment ..................................................................... 9 Chart Two: Free/Reduced Eligible and Percent at Grade Level .............................................................. 10 Chart Three: Free/Reduced Eligible and College/Career Ready ............................................................. 11 Chart Four: Student Enrollment and At Grade Level .............................................................................. 12 Chart Five: Student Enrollment and College/Career Ready.................................................................... 13 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 14 Discussion ................................................................................................................................................... 15 Student Poverty ...................................................................................................................................... 15 School Size............................................................................................................................................... 16 Methods This report presents the results of a statistical analysis to determine the extent to which a school’s enrollment size and the percent of students eligible for free or reduced‐price lunch pred

FAQs

What two school factors does the report analyze?

The report analyzes school enrollment size and the percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch as measures related to poverty.

Which assessment outcomes are modeled for Math and ELA?

It models the percent performing at grade level or above and the percent performing college/career ready for both Math and ELA.

How does the report measure poverty?

Poverty is measured using the percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch at the school level.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by WPS_1786070896