Math
83%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Public elementary school
Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila
High scores, real growth, strong attendance. We looked for a catch — we didn't find one.
69% of tested students are Proficient or Advanced in English and 83% in math. Explore the evidence alongside the opportunities your child would use.
SchoolScope archetype
High Ceiling
What this means for your family
Ask what happens for a kid who shows up behind — a high ceiling for the top can sit right next to thin support at the bottom, and the score alone won't show you which.
How archetypes are assigned →Data sources · Methodology · State tests: 2025
Contact
Phone(415) 241-6325
Websitesfusd.edu (opens in new tab)
DistrictSan Francisco Unified
PrincipalMia Yee
GradesTK-5
Enrollment407 students
English
69%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Students
407Total enrollment
Chronic absence
5%Students absent 10% or more of school days
What are you trying to decide?
The overall score is a starting point.
Look at subject results, trends and student groups, then consider the opportunities your child would use.
View school performance →Start with your child’s daily experience.
Explore teaching, coursework and student-group results. A schoolwide average cannot predict an individual experience.
Explore student experience →Confirm the enrollment route.
Check the address, grade and enrollment requirements directly with the district or school.
Check attendance and enrollment →Compare the options you can access.
Use comparable evidence alongside entry requirements, cost and location.
Compare nearby schools →Academic performance
What do the results tell us?
2025 results · Grades 3 & 5 · weighted by students tested within each subject.
Proficient or Advanced combines Levels 3 and 4, formerly Standard Met and Standard Exceeded. California changed the names for 2025–26; the cut scores did not. About the labels →
Share at Proficient or Advanced
● Math┄ English
Gaps in the lines mark years without annual results.
Exact annual results
| Year | Math | English |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 91% | 88% |
| 2022 | 92% | 80% |
| 2023 | 77% | 76% |
| 2024 | 88% | 77% |
| 2025 | 83% | 69% |
Each year describes that year’s tested students. Changes between years do not follow the same children over time. Cohort-growth evidence, when available, is labeled separately below.
How achievement is distributed
AdvancedStandard Exceeded
57%ProficientStandard Met
26%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
15%MinimalStandard Not Met
2%AdvancedStandard Exceeded
44%ProficientStandard Met
25%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
25%MinimalStandard Not Met
6%Achievement-level percentages are not percentiles. “Developing” here is a test achievement level, separate from the SchoolScope performance band with the same name.
Annual results and the full academic record
Is it getting better · CAASPP 2019 to 2025
Has held the 99th-percentile line every tested year since 2019.
Most rating sites would stop at “81% proficient” and call it done. Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila deserves a closer read. One in three of its students qualify for free or reduced lunch (California: 64%) — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.
Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila's low-income kids hit 56.3% proficiency in ELA — a number the same group reaches at 38.2% statewide. If you're trying to read past zip-code-driven test scores, that's the signal worth weighing.
184 tested · 3 of 3 grades published · cohort of 55 tracked
Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila scores 82 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 99th percentile of 5,721 California elementary schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
This school hasn't fully recovered from the pandemic: 81% meet the standard today, versus 89% in 2019 — a gap worth asking about on a visit.
Percentile among 5,721 elementary schools statewide
ELAGreen(Declined)MathBlue(Increased)
ShowHide the by-grade tables, year by year
ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 85% | 83% | 75% | 65% | 52% |
| Grade 4 | 86% | 88% | 93% | 95% | 84% |
| Grade 5 | 91% | 78% | 76% | 90% | 89% |
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 92% | 92% | 74% | 83% | 77% |
| Grade 4 | 90% | 74% | 90% | 93% | 94% |
| Grade 5 | 91% | 92% | 80% | 93% | 91% |
Where students land · CAASPP 2024–25
Four in five of students here meet the standard. More than half clear it by a lot.
ELA74% met or exceeded
Exceeded 52%Met 22%Nearly Met 20%Not Met 6%
Math87% met or exceeded
Exceeded 65%Met 21%Nearly Met 12%Not Met 1%
Exceeded Met Nearly Met Not Met
California elementary schools · average21% exceeded · 43% met or exceeded
This school against the California average
2019–2025 trend · CDE CAASPP
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 82 | 59% | 81% | Strong · p95 | 5.4% | 0.1% |
| CA average · Elementary School | 39 | 21% | 43% | Average · p50 | 17.9% | 1.6% |
This schoolCA avg
Scope8239
% Exceeded59%21%
% Met+81%43%
Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)Strong · p95Average · p50
Absence5.4%17.9%
Suspension0.1%1.6%
California’s growth results and student groups
State growth model · CDE growth model 2024–25
Our growth read and California's own model agree — both land near the 98th percentile of elementary schools.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
California runs its own growth model, following individual children in grades 4 through 8 rather than comparing school-wide averages the way we do. The two measures land in the same neighbourhood here — ours puts this school around the 95th percentile of California elementary schools, the state's around the 98th in reading and math together. Two different methods agreeing is the most you can ask of one year of test data.
— pts vs expected is scale-score points above or below what California's model predicted for these same children from their own prior-year scores. It is not a percentage and not a percent of anything. A typical California elementary school lands at +2 in reading, and the middle half of them fall between −5 and +9 — the spread is wide, so read the rank, not the sign. CDE blends two consecutive years into each published figure, so adjacent years share input data and no year-over-year trend can honestly be drawn from them. It covers grades 4-8 only, and it is not part of the Scope Score — we assessed it and left it out: it tracks school demographics roughly three times as strongly as our own growth measure does, and one published year is not enough to test how stable it is.
The returning cohort, two years on
ELA · 2023 · Grade 3
31%
exceeded standard · 75% met or exceeded
ELA · 2025 · Grade 5
54%
exceeded standard · 89% met or exceeded
n = 55
returning cohort
returning cohort
Percent exceeded, ELA only. SchoolScope's scored growth measure uses a different metric — mean scale-score change across ELA and Math; California's own matched-student model is below.
Both measures, each ranked in its own field
Our growth measurereturning cohort, G3→G5SchoolScope growth measure: 95th percentile among California elementary schools.95th pctile
State model · readingmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, reading: +22 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 97th percentile of 7,519 reported schools.97th pctile · +22 pts
State model · mathmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, math: +60 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 99th percentile of 7,518 reported schools.99th pctile · +60 pts
this school| the tick is the middle of the California field
Students & opportunity
Who shares in the school’s results?
Who it works for · CAASPP 2024–25
Low-income students here meet the ELA standard ahead of the same group statewide.
56.3% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard — versus 38.2% for the same group statewide. This comparison does not tell us what caused the difference.
Met or exceeded · reading and math combined
All students at this school: 80% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 80%, district —, state 43%80%
AsianAsian: this school 78%, district 69%, state 72%78% · −3 vs school
FemaleFemale: this school 79%, district 50%, state 44%79% · −1 vs school
MaleMale: this school 82%, district 49%, state 42%82% · +1 vs school
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 69%, district 36%, state 32%69% · −11 vs school
Two or More RacesTwo or More Races: this school 86%, district 63%, state 56%86% · +6 vs school
English LearnersEnglish Learners: this school 37%, district 10%, state 11%37% · −44 vs school
5 of 12 student groups here are too small to report — a privacy protection, not a gap.
this school district, same group California, same group
ShowHide Student-group results by grade
Student-group results by grade
Results compare different grade groups in the same year, relative to the lowest tested grade. They do not track the same children over time. Groups with fewer than 10 tested students per grade are not shown.
Low-income student ELA proficiency rises by 47.5pp from grade 3 to grade 5 at this school. District average: +9.2pp.
ShowHide California's growth model by student group
The state's growth model, by student group
California follows these children individually and predicts each one's score from their own prior year. Each row is read against the same group at a typical California elementary school — not against zero, and not against this school's all-students figure, because the state's expectation already differs by group.
Reading
Asian90 studentsAsian, reading: +19 scale-score points versus expectation, against +7 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 90 students.+19 pts · +12 vs typical
English Learner62 studentsEnglish Learner, reading: +13 scale-score points versus expectation, against −2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 62 students.+13 pts · +15 vs typical
Recently reclassified49 studentsRecently reclassified, reading: +15 scale-score points versus expectation, against +8 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 49 students.+15 pts · +7 vs typical
Low-income students43 studentsLow-income students, reading: +20 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 43 students.+20 pts · +20 vs typical
Math
Asian89 studentsAsian, math: +60 scale-score points versus expectation, against +16 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 89 students.+60 pts · +44 vs typical
English Learner61 studentsEnglish Learner, math: +60 scale-score points versus expectation, against +2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 61 students.+60 pts · +58 vs typical
Recently reclassified48 studentsRecently reclassified, math: +57 scale-score points versus expectation, against +6 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 48 students.+57 pts · +51 vs typical
Low-income students43 studentsLow-income students, math: +62 scale-score points versus expectation, against −1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 43 students.+62 pts · +63 vs typical
this school typical California elementary school, same group| the centre tick is 0 = as predicted
— 3 more groups are reported here with between 11 and 29 students. We hold those back on purpose: at that size the figure swings about 17 points on its own, and a quarter of such groups land past the state's top or bottom cut point by chance alone. They are listed with their student counts in the data appendix. — A group not listed at all had fewer than 11 students with a growth score, so California published nothing for it here. That is a privacy protection, not a judgment about those students. — Context only. None of this enters the Scope Score.
The daily experience
What is it like to be a student here?
Students per teacher
Student–teacher ratio is a schoolwide staffing measure, not an average class size.
Teacher experience
Average teacher experience in the published staffing record. It does not measure individual teacher effectiveness.
Chronically absent
The share of students absent for at least 10% of their enrolled school days. Attendance reflects both school and out-of-school circumstances.
The people teaching · CDE staffing 2024–25
About 25 students for every teacher here.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Students per teacher25 · district 22
Teaching staff18 teachers
Avg. experience13.7 years
Fully credentialed88%
PrincipalMia Yee
ShowHide what the district pays
Teacher salary schedule$69,525 – $131,654
Principal salary$150,963 – $163,648
Superintendent salary$328,879
Pay is set by the district, not the school.
Attendance & discipline · 2024–25
Kids here show up more, and get suspended less, than the state average.
Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 5.4%, district 25.8%, state 17.9%5.4% · −12.4pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 0.1%, district —, state 1.6%0.1% · −1.5pp vs state
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
ShowHide attendance by student group and by grade
Chronic absenteeism by grade band
Grades 4–63.3%
TK/K5.6%
Resources & neighborhood
What sits behind the school experience?
Explore school spending and the district budget
What gets spent · FY 2024–25
It spends $20,160 per student, more than the California average.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
These measure different things: this figure is spending attributed to this campus, while district-wide figures also include central administration, districtwide programs, and the state's pension contributions made on the district's behalf — costs that never get assigned to a single school. The district number runs higher at nearly every school, not just this one.
The district's current expense of education per student, from CDE's annual SACS filing — the freshest district spending figure the state publishes.
Per-pupil spendingPer-pupil spending: $20,160, CA average $14,491$20,160 · spent at this school
District current expense · FY 2024–25$26,762 per student
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction 60%Instruction support 12%Student services 15%Administration 6%Buildings & maintenance 7%Other 1%
District-level, from the district's own SACS general-ledger filing — school-by-school breakdowns aren't published by the state.
ShowHide the district's spending year by year
district detail, 2016–2020 — the newest published
2020$17,416 per pupil
2019$17,139 per pupil
2018$17,228 per pupil
2017$13,640 per pupil
2016$11,532 per pupil
Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →
The neighborhood · ACS 2024
One in three of students here qualify for free or reduced lunch, versus three in five statewide.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Worth knowing
Transitional kindergarten is offered here — confirmed by actual Census Day enrollment, not just the listed grade span.
On the state's science test (CAST), 78% met or exceeded the standard — science is tested in grades 5 and 8 and once in high school, and it never enters the Scope Score.
Hispanic or Latino5.4% · district 36.7% · CA 56.1%
White3.4% · district 13.1% · CA 19.9%
Asian76.4% · district 27.7% · CA 10.2%
Black0.7% · district 7.3% · CA 4.8%
Other14.0% · district 15.1% · CA 9.0%
Free or reduced lunch36.4% · CA 64%
Median income$167K · CA $85K
Median home value$1.60M · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+79% · CA 35%
ZIP population36,198
Median age35 years
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2024) · ZIP-level
Culture & philosophy
What is the school’s approach?
School-stated approach · questions for your visit
Look beyond the brochure
A source-reviewed culture summary is not available for this profile yet. Ask how teaching, student support and family communication work day to day.
Read the school’s own website ↗Family voices
What would you want another family to know about the daily experience here?
Ask a current family: “When your child needs help, how does the school respond?”
Educator voices
What should families understand about teaching, support and the school community?
Ask an educator: “How do you adapt a typical day for children with different needs?”
Compare nearby schools
What are the alternatives?
Compare schools serving the same grade stage. Private schools have no comparable state-test score.
2025 · elementary schools · combined reading and math measures. Percentiles compare schools within their enrollment group.
No nearby schools in this category are listed. The school being viewed stays visible for reference.
| School | Type | Performance band | Advanced | Proficient or Advanced | Distance | Select |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila | Public | Strong | 59% | 81% | School being viewed | |
| Yu (Alice Fong) Elementary | Public | Strong | 56% | 82% | 1.5 mi | |
| Peabody (George) Elementary | Public | Strong | 53% | 80% | 1.5 mi | |
| Lilienthal (Claire) Elementary | Public | Strong | 51% | 74% | 2.3 mi |
More nearby public and private options
Your other options
Your other options
Nearby public schools across grade levels, plus private options within 10 miles.
Private schools do not receive a Scope Score or statewide ranking on SchoolScope.
20 private schools within 10 miles
Not scored
What should I check before applying?
- District public
- Confirm the attendance boundary and any permit options.
- Charter
- Check applications, priorities and deadlines with each school.
- Private
- Confirm admission requirements, tuition and financial aid.
Moving & enrollment
Which schools could serve my child?
Check your address with the district
School location and nearby schools do not establish attendance eligibility. Confirm boundaries and permit requirements with San Francisco Unified.
District information →School website →Schools across the K–12 journey
Elementary · K–5
Middle · 6–8
Brown Jr. (Willie L) MiddlePublished boundary overlapScope Score 42/100
Giannini (A.P.) MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 63/100
Aptos MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 57/100
Francisco MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 33/100
Hoover (Herbert) MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 51/100
Denman (James) MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 26/100
Lick (James) MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 25/100
Marina MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 47/100
King Jr. (Martin Luther) Academic MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 24/100
Presidio MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 65/100
Roosevelt MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 65/100
Visitacion Valley MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 12/100
Everett MiddleAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 12/100
High school · 9–12
Marshall (Thurgood) HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 25/100
Lincoln (Abraham) HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 66/100
Balboa HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 60/100
Galileo HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 58/100
Washington (George) HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 68/100
Lowell HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 87/100
Mission HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 34/100
O'Connell (John) HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 29/100
Wallenberg (Raoul) Traditional HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 59/100
Burton (Phillip and Sala) Academic HighPublished boundary overlapScope Score 55/100
The road from this school ends at Marshall (Thurgood) High, which sent 5 graduates to UC campuses last fall and teaches 5 AP subjects. Those numbers describe past cohorts — a child starting here today would reach Marshall (Thurgood) High around 2035, and 10 years is a long time for a school to hold still, and by the state's 2023 count 57% of Marshall (Thurgood) High's graduates enrolled in college somewhere, UC or not.
5 UC enrollees (fall 2025) · 5 AP subjects taught → full record on Marshall (Thurgood) High's page
Source: UC & College Board
Source: sabs_2016. Schools are grouped by grade stage. Nearby schools are not confirmed feeder links or address assignments. Verify the current path and eligibility with the district.
Plan your next step
What should I do next?
Worth a school visit
Ask what the school is working on next. Strong numbers tell you where a school is, not where it's going.
- Ask how teachers track each child's growth over the year, not just where the class lands on test day.
- Ask whether extra support — tutoring, counseling, small groups — reaches kids across income lines, not just the students already ahead.
- Ask whether the tour can step into a working classroom — watch how the teacher handles a student who's stuck.
- Ask to tour while school's in session, and notice how hallways and transitions feel — culture shows up between classes, not just in them.
- Ask how the school communicates with families when a child starts to struggle.
- Ask what a typical day looks like for a new student in the first few weeks.
Questions
Frequently asked questions
Is Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila a good elementary school?
Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila has a Scope Score of 82 out of 100, placing it in the 99th percentile of California elementary schools and ranked #58 statewide. 59.2% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is 37.8 percentage points above the California average of 21.4%. The Scope Score weights 6 dimensions for elementary schools: exceeded standard (42%), met or exceeded (proficient) (23%), grade 3-to-5 growth (20%), chronic absenteeism (5%), suspension rate (5%), and ELPAC English Learner proficiency (5%). Data source: California Department of Education CAASPP 2025, analyzed by SchoolScope.
What are Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila's CAASPP test scores?
On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 81.0% of students at Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 59.2% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 21.9% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 59.2% went beyond it. Most rating sites report only the combined "proficient" number. SchoolScope surfaces the exceeded-vs-met split because it shows how many students go beyond the standard rather than only meeting it. 366 student-subject combinations were assessed.
How does Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila rank in California?
Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila ranks #58 among California elementary schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 99th percentile. This ranking is based on a weighted composite of 2025 CAASPP test performance (exceeded and met rates), same-cohort growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5), chronic absenteeism, and suspension rate. Unlike single-number ratings, the Scope Score shows what drives the ranking so parents can decide what matters most to their family. See full methodology.
Is Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila getting better or worse?
SchoolScope follows the same cohort of students across grades rather than comparing two different grades in the same year. At Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila that cohort is 2023 G3 → 2025 G5, measured in SBAC scale-score points. Its gain ranks strong among California elementary schools — roughly the 95th percentile, ahead of the typical school at this level. Read the ranking, not the raw point gain: scale scores rise with age, so nearly every school posts a positive number and only the relative position tells you anything. Growth is weighted at 20% in the elementary Scope Score because it is the least demographically confounded signal available — it tracks change over time rather than the level students arrived at. See full methodology.
What is the attendance and school culture like at Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila?
5.4% of students at Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), which is better than the California average of 17.9%. The suspension rate is 0.1%, indicating a low-discipline-incident environment. SchoolScope includes these culture metrics in the Scope Score because they reflect day-to-day school experience in ways test scores alone cannot.
How does Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila compare to other schools in San Francisco?
Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila scores 82/100 (99th percentile) among California elementary schools. To compare with nearby schools, SchoolScope shows the same metrics side by side: exceeded rate, proficiency, growth trajectory, and school culture indicators. The school serves 407 students. Use the schools in San Francisco page or the map view to compare all elementary schools nearby.
How does Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila serve low-income and underrepresented students?
At Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila in San Francisco, 56.3% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 38.8% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila outperforms its district average for low-income students by 17.5 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (81.7% Math proficient); Asian students (69.5% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 74.6 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 71 students tested. SchoolScope shows disaggregated test scores by demographic subgroup so you can see how a school performs for your child's specific group — not just the school-wide average. Subgroup data is context, not part of the Scope Score: we don't penalize schools for who they serve. See our equity approach.
What middle school does Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila feed into?
By attendance boundary, Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila is zoned to Brown Jr. (Willie L) Middle. Brown Jr. (Willie L) Middle has a Scope Score of 42 out of 100. Boundaries come from the U.S. Department of Education's School Attendance Boundary Survey, a 2015-16 collection and the most recent national one — they are approximate and may since have changed. A boundary is also not a placement guarantee: magnet, charter, open-enrollment and inter-district transfer options mean students from one school often continue to several different ones. Confirm your address with the district before making an enrollment or housing decision. Data source: NCES School Attendance Boundary Survey, analyzed by SchoolScope.
Use the published evidence to prepare questions, then verify fit and access with the school.
Behind the evidence
Inspect the full record
Public sources, visible methods and the underlying school record. Source years and limitations stay attached to the evidence.
How the Scope Score is calculated
On a narrow screen, scroll the table sideways to see the state comparison and weights.
What the score weighs · CAASPP 2024–25
How far the top scorers get carries this score.
59.2% of students scored in the top band on the state test. The California average is 21.4%.
The school's returning cohort — mostly, not exactly, the same kids two years on — gained 96 scale-score points across the span. Almost every school gains points, so we rank the gain against every other California school in this level.
| What we weigh | Here | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 59.2% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 81.0% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Strong | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 5.4% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 0.1% | 1.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 22.9% | 18.0% | 5% |
Source CAASPP 2025 · California Department of Education. Measures test performance, attendance, and climate — not arts, community, or your kid. How the score is built
A closer look at the evidence
Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila: reading the evidence
Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila posts 59.2% exceeding the standard — versus 21.4% statewide — with climate numbers better than most. That doesn't make it perfect. It makes it worth a visit to find what numbers can't measure.
Subject proficiency describes tested students, while graduation describes a graduating cohort. These figures are not successive stages followed by the same students.
Ask what happens for a kid who shows up behind — a high ceiling for the top can sit right next to thin support at the bottom, and the score alone won't show you which.
Explore the underlying data →Every number: score factors, grades, student groups and downloads
Every number · For the data nerds
Every number on this page
Score factors, grade-level breakdowns, subgroup proficiency, and nearest schools.
Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila is ranked #58 statewide · #1 of 74 in San Francisco Unified.
01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
| Factor | School | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 59.2% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 81.0% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Strong | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 5.4% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 0.1% | 1.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 22.9% | 18.0% | 5% |
- Exceeded standard
- ↑ vs CA 21.4% · index 87 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Met or exceeded
- ↑ vs CA 42.7% · index 79 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)
- ↑ vs CA average · 95th pctile
- Chronic absenteeism
- ↑ vs CA 17.9% · index 70 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · ▲ 0.6pp higher vs 2024
- Suspension rate
- ↑ vs CA 1.6% · index 62 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · → no change vs 2024
- EL proficiency (ELPAC)
- ↑ vs CA 18.0% · index 57 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
02By grade & subgroupCAASPP 2024–25 · % of tested students
ShowHide table 02 — By grade & subgroup
| ELA | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 66 | 36% | 15% | 39% | 9% | 52% | +8 |
| Grade 4 | 62 | 66% | 18% | 10% | 6% | 84% | +39 |
| Grade 5 | 56 | 54% | 36% | 9% | 2% | 89% | +42 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 66 | 42% | 35% | 21% | 2% | 77% | +32 |
| Grade 4 | 62 | 81% | 13% | 6% | 0% | 94% | +52 |
| Grade 5 | 54 | 76% | 15% | 7% | 2% | 91% | +56 |
We show the grade rows CDE publishes for this school. A missing grade or dash can mean the school does not serve that grade, that we hold no valid result for it, or that the tested group was too small to report. It does not mean zero.
| Science (CAST) | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Schoolwide | 55 | 35% | 44% | 22% | 0% |
CAST is tested in grades 5 and 8, then once in grade 10, 11, or 12. This row is the school's all-student aggregate. Not part of the Scope Score.
| Subgroup · ELA | Tested | MET+ | vs district | vs CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 71 | 56.3% | +18 | +18 |
| Asian | 141 | 69.5% | −1 | −5 |
| English Learners | 26 | 15.4% | +8 | +5 |
03Nearest elementary schoolssorted by Scope Score · Grade gap = grade 3 vs grade 5, this year, different students; Cohort growth = one school's returning cohort tracked across grades (mostly, not exactly, the same kids), in scale-score points — that's the measurement the Scope Score weights
| School | Dist | Scope | EXC | MET+ | Grade gap | Cohort growth | Susp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila ← | — | 82 | 59.2% | 81.0% | +25.6pp | +96 pts | 0.1% |
| Yu (Alice Fong) Elementary | 1.5 mi | 76 | 55.5% | 81.7% | +2.6pp | — | 0.1% |
| Peabody (George) Elementary | 1.5 mi | 71 | 52.9% | 79.8% | +12.5pp | — | 0.2% |
| Lilienthal (Claire) Elementary | 2.3 mi | 69 | 51.1% | 74.1% | +11.0pp | — | 0.4% |
| California average | — | 39 | 21.4% | 42.7% | −2.9pp | — | 1.6% |
04More measurescontext · not all part of the Scope Score
ShowHide table 04 — More measures
| Year | Scope | Pctile | Rank | Exc | Met+ | Absent | Susp | Grade gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 87 | 99 | #66 | 64.9% | 89.2% | 2.2% | 0.1% | +2.7pp |
| 2022 | 82 | 97 | #157 | 56.9% | 84.3% | 8.3% | 0.1% | -2.5pp |
| 2023 | 76 | 95 | #295 | 50.2% | 81.5% | 6.5% | 0.1% | +3.6pp |
| 2024 | 80 | 98 | #98 | 58.3% | 86.5% | 4.8% | 0.1% | +17.9pp |
| 2025 | 82 | 99 | #58 | 59.2% | 81.0% | 5.4% | 0.1% | +25.6pp |
Grade gap = this year's grade 3 vs grade 5 result, two different sets of students, not a trend for any one child — it is not the measurement the Scope Score's growth dimension uses. See §01 above and /methodology#verdicts for the school's actual scored (cohort) growth.
NO STATEWIDE TESTING 2020–21 (COVID) · SCORE AND PERCENTILE ARE RELATIVE TO EACH YEAR'S FIELD
05Climate by student groupchronic absenteeism · 2019 vs 2025 — the two years CDE publishes at subgroup level
ShowHide table 05 — Climate by student group
| Group | 2019 | 2025 | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 1.8% | 4.5% | +2.7pp |
| Male | 1.2% | 4.3% | +3.1pp |
| Asian | 0.4% | 2.6% | +2.2pp |
| Hispanic/Latino | 7.7% | 12.5% | +4.8pp |
| Two or More Races | 0.0% | 2.7% | +2.7pp |
| White | 2.9% | 21.4% | +18.5pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 0.0% | 9.4% | +9.4pp |
| English Learners | 1.1% | 2.1% | +1.0pp |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 2.9% | 5.1% | +2.2pp |
| All Students | 1.5% | 4.4% | +2.9pp |
06California growth model, by student group2025 · scale-score points vs the state's prediction · shown, never scored
ShowHide table 06 — California growth model, by student group
| Group | Reading | n | CDE band | Math | n | CDE band |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All Students | +22 | 117 | Exceptional | +60 | 115 | Exceptional |
| Asian | +19 | 90 | Accelerated | +60 | 89 | Exceptional |
| English Learner | +13 | 62 | Accelerated | +60 | 61 | Exceptional |
| Recently Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only | +15 | 49 | not categorised | +57 | 48 | not categorised |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | +20 | 43 | Exceptional | +62 | 43 | Exceptional |
| English Only | +28 | 27 | not categorised | +47 | 27 | not categorised |
| English Learners Only | −4 | 13 | not categorised | +67 | 13 | not categorised |
| Two or More Races | +37 | 11 | Exceptional | +45 | 11 | Exceptional |
Whole scale-score points above or below what CDE's model predicted for these same children from their own prior-year scores — not a percentage, not a percentile. Statewide a typical school lands near +1 with a spread of about 13 points either side, so read a figure against its group's own typical value, not against zero. Muted rows have fewer than 30 students with a growth score — published by CDE, held back from the narrative sections above because at that size the figure swings about 17 points on its own. “Not categorised” is CDE assigning no band — English Only, Recently Reclassified, and English Learners Only receive a value and no band, for every school in the state. It is not a missing number. Most figures blend two consecutive years, so adjacent published years share input data and no trend line can honestly be drawn across them. A group absent from this table had fewer than 11 students with a growth score and was never published. Grades 4-8 only. None of this enters the Scope Score — it is more strongly correlated with school demographics than our own growth measure, and one published year is not enough to test its reliability.
Embed this scorecard
<iframe
src="https://schoolscope.co/embed/school/chinese-immersion-school-at-deavila-0386"
width="100%" height="210" loading="lazy"
style="border:0;border-radius:12px"
title="Chinese Immersion School at DeAvila — SchoolScope scorecard">
</iframe>Free to embed with the credit link. Data updates automatically.
EXC = exceeded standard · MET+ = met or exceeded ("proficient") · Source: CA Dept. of Education · CAASPP 2024–25 · n=5,721 elementary schools · Vintages: climate subgroups 2019+2025 · district finance per its label · ACS 2022 · Data updated 2026-09-18
SchoolScope scores and verdicts are our interpretation of public California Department of Education data — independent analysis, not an official rating. How we analyze · Request a correction