Douglas J. Miller Elementary: Kids show up here. Test scores are still catching up.
Douglas J. Miller's strongest numbers are the quiet ones: attendance and discipline. The academic picture is still developing — and culture is usually where that starts.
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 43 | 18% | 43% | -17.3 | 14.1% | 1.1% |
| CA average · Elementary School | 45 | 21% | 43% | -2.9 | 17.9% | 1.6% |
Douglas J. Miller Elementary scores 43 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 52nd percentile of 5,744 California elementary schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
Measures test performance, attendance, and climate — not arts, community, or your kid. How we score →
🤝 Culture First — Ask whether the low absenteeism and suspension numbers come from what the school does or from the community it serves — both can produce the same numbers, and only a visit tells you which.
Most rating sites would stop at “43% proficient” and call it done. Douglas J. Miller deserves a closer read. The school sits in Bakersfield, where three in four students qualify for free or reduced lunch — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.
Douglas J. Miller's low-income kids hit 48.7% 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.
The seven-year arc
Has stayed near the 52nd percentile since 2019.
This school hasn't fully recovered from the pandemic: 43% meet the standard today, versus 51% in 2019 — a gap worth asking about on a visit.
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 50% | 50% | 33% | 47% | 49% |
| Grade 4 | 57% | 56% | 54% | 36% | 47% |
| Grade 5 | 46% | 47% | 46% | 52% | 45% |
| Grade 6 | 49% | 43% | 42% | 42% | 60% |
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 59% | 53% | 36% | 42% | 51% |
| Grade 4 | 55% | 36% | 46% | 31% | 43% |
| Grade 5 | 38% | 23% | 30% | 39% | 21% |
| Grade 6 | 29% | 26% | 16% | 28% | 41% |
The story this school is actually telling
The school, grade by grade
ELA · CAASPP 2024–25Different students, same year — each bar is one grade's proficiency mix.
The honest read: the share exceeding falls 11.0pp across grades; the floor slips 4.6pp. The state average rises 4.5pp over the same span. The school's 5th graders aren't posting a wider lead than its 3rd graders. One question worth asking on a tour: are the strongest students being pushed, or coasting? A school visit and conversation with teachers will tell you more than this number.
Douglas J. Miller's most underrated number
48.7% of low-income students met the ELA standard — versus 38.2% for the same group statewide. That's the strongest kind of signal a school can post: it holds across income lines.
The 6 things our score weighs
Ask how the school built its attendance culture — and what the academic plan looks like from here.
- Ask what changes between grade 3 and grade 5 here, and who teaches the older kids.
- 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.
How every group of students does here
At Douglas J. Miller Elementary in Bakersfield, 48.7% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 42.2% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Douglas J. Miller Elementary outperforms its district average for low-income students by 6.4 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (36.4% Math proficient); Hispanic students (43.4% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 36.2 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 452 students tested.
5 of 15 student groups here are too small to report — a privacy protection, not a gap.
Change in proficiency from the lowest tested grade — which groups gain ground the longer they stay. Groups with fewer than 10 tested students per grade are not shown.
Low-income student ELA proficiency falls by 7.2pp from grade 3 to grade 5 at this school. District average: +3.3pp.
Showing up, and staying in class
TK/K students miss school at roughly twice the rate of Grades 4–6 students (18.0% vs 9.9%). Chronic absence here concentrates in the earliest grades — worth asking how the school works with new families on attendance.
Where the path goes
The path below follows attendance boundaries — scores shown for each next step.
Feeder patterns derived from NCES attendance boundary data. Boundaries are approximate and may have changed — verify with your school district for current assignments.
The people teaching here
Pay is set by the district, not the school.
What gets spent here
$1,243 per student arrives as federal Title funding — a measure of concentrated need, not school quality.
The district's current expense of education per student, from CDE's annual SACS filing — the freshest district spending figure the state publishes.
District-level, from the district's own SACS general-ledger filing — school-by-school breakdowns aren't published by the state.
Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →
The neighborhood it serves
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2024) · ZIP-level
At 994 students, this school is well above the typical California elementary school (≈480).
Transitional kindergarten is offered here — confirmed by actual Census Day enrollment, not just the listed grade span.
On the state's science test (CAST), 28% met or exceeded the standard — science is tested in grades 5 and 8 but never enters the Scope Score.
Frequently asked questions
Is Douglas J. Miller Elementary a good elementary school?
What are Douglas J. Miller Elementary's CAASPP test scores?
How does Douglas J. Miller Elementary rank in California?
Is Douglas J. Miller Elementary getting better or worse?
What is the attendance and school culture like at Douglas J. Miller Elementary?
How does Douglas J. Miller Elementary compare to other schools in Bakersfield?
How does Douglas J. Miller Elementary serve low-income and underrepresented students?
Your other options
Nearby Elementary Schools
3 within ~3 mi · avg 48
Private alternatives nearby
Private schools within ~10 miles. These schools do not participate in state testing and cannot be scored or ranked.
Every number on this page
Score factors, grade-level breakdowns, subgroup proficiency, and peer comparisons.
| ELA | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 140 | 26% | 24% | 25% | 26% | 49% | +6 |
| Grade 4 | 135 | 27% | 21% | 25% | 27% | 47% | +3 |
| Grade 5 | 150 | 15% | 30% | 19% | 36% | 45% | −3 |
| Grade 6 | 142 | 25% | 35% | 25% | 15% | 60% | +13 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 140 | 19% | 31% | 25% | 24% | 51% | +5 |
| Grade 4 | 137 | 14% | 29% | 34% | 23% | 43% | +1 |
| Grade 5 | 150 | 8% | 13% | 33% | 47% | 21% | −15 |
| Grade 6 | 142 | 19% | 22% | 30% | 30% | 41% | +6 |
| Science (CAST) | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 5/8/11 | 151 | 6% | 22% | 52% | 20% |
CAST is tested in grades 5, 8, and once in high school — not annually. Not part of the Scope Score.
| Subgroup · ELA | Tested | MET+ | vs district | vs CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 452 | 48.7% | +6 | +10 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 304 | 43.4% | +0 | +5 |
| Asian | 167 | 58.7% | −10 | −16 |
| School | Dist | Scope | EXC | MET+ | Growth | Susp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Douglas J. Miller Elementary ← | — | 43 | 18.0% | 42.6% | −17.3 | 1.1% |
| W. A. Kendrick Elementary | 2.6 mi | 60 | 35.0% | 59.9% | +15.9 | 0.5% |
| Granite Pointe Elementary | 1.8 mi | 45 | 21.1% | 42.0% | −9.9 | 0.2% |
| Sing Lum Elementary | 2.7 mi | 39 | 11.9% | 37.7% | −6.1 | 0.8% |
| California average | — | 45 | 21.3% | 42.7% | −2.9 | 1.6% |
| Year | Scope | Pctile | Rank | Exc | Met+ | Absent | Susp | Growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 44 | 54 | #2522 | 20.1% | 50.9% | 6.9% | 2.4% | -12.3pp |
| 2022 | 37 | 53 | #2704 | 18.6% | 44.3% | 36.9% | 1.1% | -16.6pp |
| 2023 | 45 | 63 | #2120 | 17.6% | 40.8% | 25.2% | 1.7% | +3.6pp |
| 2024 | 43 | 53 | #2714 | 17.9% | 41.3% | 18.4% | 1.0% | +0.5pp |
| 2025 | 43 | 52 | #2758 | 18.0% | 42.6% | 14.1% | 1.1% | -17.3pp |
| Group | 2019 | 2025 | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 7.0% | 13.1% | +6.1pp |
| Male | 6.8% | 14.9% | +8.1pp |
| Asian | 5.3% | 8.2% | +2.9pp |
| Black/African American | 16.4% | 20.8% | +4.4pp |
| White | 0.0% | — | — |
| Hispanic/Latino | 6.2% | 16.7% | +10.5pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 14.1% | 24.2% | +10.1pp |
| English Learners | 9.0% | 9.1% | +0.1pp |
| Homeless | 4.0% | — | — |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 7.9% | 15.1% | +7.2pp |
| All Students | 6.9% | 14.0% | +7.1pp |
| Filipino | — | 11.8% | — |
| Two or More Races | — | 9.1% | — |
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