Math
40%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Public elementary school
E. J. Marshall Elementary
This school runs ahead of the state average. The bar itself is the harder conversation.
54% of tested students are Proficient or Advanced in English and 40% in math. Explore the evidence alongside the opportunities your child would use.
SchoolScope archetype
Building Momentum
What this means for your family
This label means the data doesn't clearly sort the school one way or the other — ask what the school is proud of, and what it's working on.
How archetypes are assigned →Data sources · Methodology · State tests: 2025
Contact
Phone(909) 627-9741
DistrictChino Valley Unified
PrincipalOfelia Verdugo
GradesPre-K-6
Enrollment417 students
English
54%Grades 3 & 5 · Proficient or Advanced
Students
417Total enrollment
Chronic absence
15%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 | 39% | 46% |
| 2022 | 29% | 46% |
| 2023 | 40% | 58% |
| 2024 | 38% | 46% |
| 2025 | 40% | 54% |
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
17%ProficientStandard Met
24%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
21%MinimalStandard Not Met
38%AdvancedStandard Exceeded
27%ProficientStandard Met
27%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
24%MinimalStandard Not Met
22%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
Climbed from the 43rd to the 60th percentile since 2019 — past roughly 800 elementary schools.
Most rating sites would stop at “48% proficient” and call it done. E. J. Marshall deserves a closer read. Four in five of its students qualify for free or reduced lunch (California: 64%) — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.
E. J. Marshall'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.
217 tested · 3 of 3 grades published · cohort of 64 tracked
E. J. Marshall Elementary scores 40 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 60th percentile of 5,721 California elementary schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
The pandemic drop is behind this school: 48% of students meet the standard today, above the 40% who did in 2019.
Percentile among 5,721 elementary schools statewide
ELAGreen(Increased)MathYellow(Increased)
ShowHide the by-grade tables, year by year
ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 48% | 41% | 56% | 53% | 52% |
| Grade 4 | 35% | 50% | 44% | 38% | 49% |
| Grade 5 | 43% | 52% | 61% | 40% | 56% |
| Grade 6 | 49% | 52% | 47% | 62% | 44% |
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 52% | 35% | 45% | 55% | 48% |
| Grade 4 | 32% | 24% | 23% | 30% | 46% |
| Grade 5 | 27% | 22% | 36% | 22% | 34% |
| Grade 6 | 17% | 17% | 32% | 41% | 31% |
Where students land · CAASPP 2024–25
Two in five of students here meet the standard. One in five clear it by a lot.
ELA51% met or exceeded
Exceeded 24%Met 27%Nearly Met 22%Not Met 28%
Math39% met or exceeded
Exceeded 14%Met 26%Nearly Met 24%Not Met 37%
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 | 40 | 20% | 48% | Average · p54 | 15.2% | 0.3% |
| CA average · Elementary School | 39 | 21% | 43% | Average · p50 | 17.9% | 1.6% |
This schoolCA avg
Scope4039
% Exceeded20%21%
% Met+48%43%
Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)Average · p54Average · p50
Absence15.2%17.9%
Suspension0.3%1.6%
California’s growth results and student groups
State growth model · CDE growth model 2024–25
California's own growth model splits here — the 86th percentile in reading against the 57th in math, among 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 — and its two subjects part company here. It puts this school around the 86th percentile of California elementary schools in reading and the 57th in math; ours, which blends the subjects, lands around the 54th. A gap that size between reading and math in one building is worth asking about directly — one year of data can't tell you whether it is the teaching, the cohort, or noise.
— 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
29%
exceeded standard · 56% met or exceeded
ELA · 2025 · Grade 5
29%
exceeded standard · 56% met or exceeded
n = 64
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: 54th percentile among California elementary schools.54th pctile
State model · readingmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, reading: +13 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 86th percentile of 7,519 reported schools.86th pctile · +13 pts
State model · mathmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, math: +3 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 57th percentile of 7,518 reported schools.57th pctile · +3 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.
48.7% 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: 45% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 45%, district —, state 43%45%
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 43%, district 47%, state 32%43% · −2 vs school
Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino: this school 43%, district 43%, state 32%43% · −2 vs school
MaleMale: this school 44%, district 54%, state 42%44% · −0 vs school
FemaleFemale: this school 46%, district 57%, state 44%46% · +1 vs school
Students with DisabilitiesStudents with Disabilities: this school 29%, district 18%, state 15%29% · −16 vs school
English LearnersEnglish Learners: this school 23%, district 25%, state 11%23% · −22 vs school
HomelessHomeless: this school 42%, district 36%, state 22%42% · −3 vs school
6 of 14 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 2.6pp from grade 3 to grade 5 at this school. District average: +3.2pp.
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
Low-income students137 studentsLow-income students, reading: +11 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 137 students.+11 pts · +11 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students126 studentsHispanic or Latino students, reading: +13 scale-score points versus expectation, against +1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 126 students.+13 pts · +12 vs typical
English Only100 studentsEnglish Only, reading: +13 scale-score points versus expectation, against +3 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 100 students.+13 pts · +10 vs typical
English Learner35 studentsEnglish Learner, reading: +7 scale-score points versus expectation, against −2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 35 students.+7 pts · +9 vs typical
Math
Low-income students137 studentsLow-income students, math: +3 scale-score points versus expectation, against −1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 137 students.+3 pts · +4 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students126 studentsHispanic or Latino students, math: +3 scale-score points versus expectation, against −1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 126 students.+3 pts · +4 vs typical
English Only100 studentsEnglish Only, math: +1 scale-score points versus expectation, against +1 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 100 students.+1 pts · 0 vs typical
English Learner35 studentsEnglish Learner, math: +7 scale-score points versus expectation, against +2 for the same group at a typical California elementary school, 35 students.+7 pts · +5 vs typical
this school typical California elementary school, same group| the centre tick is 0 = as predicted
— 4 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 23 students for every teacher here.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Students per teacher23 · district 24
Teaching staff26 teachers
Avg. experience12.8 years
Fully credentialed92%
PrincipalOfelia Verdugo
ShowHide what the district pays
Teacher salary schedule$60,908 – $127,536
Principal salary$147,639 – $171,745
Superintendent salary$378,868
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.
TK/K students miss school at roughly twice the rate of Grades 4–6 students (26.6% vs 13.2%). Chronic absence here concentrates in the earliest grades — worth asking how the school works with new families on attendance.
Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 15.2%, district 14.5%, state 17.9%15.2% · −2.7pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 0.3%, district —, state 1.6%0.3% · −1.3pp vs state
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
ShowHide attendance by student group and by grade
Chronic absenteeism by grade band
Grades 4–613.2%
TK/K26.6%
Resources & neighborhood
What sits behind the school experience?
Explore school spending and the district budget
What gets spent · FY 2024–25
It spends $17,364 per student, more than the California average.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
$416 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.
Per-pupil spendingPer-pupil spending: $17,364, CA average $14,491$17,364 · spent at this school
Federal share$416 per student
District current expense · FY 2024–25$17,387 per student
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction 61%Instruction support 11%Student services 9%Administration 6%Buildings & maintenance 10%Other 3%
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$11,682 per pupil
2019$11,008 per pupil
2018$10,931 per pupil
2017$10,448 per pupil
2016$9,751 per pupil
Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →
The neighborhood · ACS 2024
Four in five of students here qualify for free or reduced lunch, versus three in five statewide.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Worth knowing
On the state's science test (CAST), 29% 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 Latino86.3% · district 54.1% · CA 56.1%
White6.0% · district 10.2% · CA 19.9%
Asian3.1% · district 22.5% · CA 10.2%
Black1.9% · district 3.9% · CA 4.8%
Other2.6% · district 9.3% · CA 9.0%
Free or reduced lunch89.2% · CA 64%
Median income$103K · CA $85K
Median home value$687K · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+25% · CA 35%
ZIP population78,754
Median age38 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E. J. Marshall Elementary | Public | Solid | 20% | 48% | School being viewed | |
| Monte Vista Elementary | Public | Strong | 33% | 58% | 2.5 mi | |
| Edwin Rhodes Elementary | Public | Strong | 36% | 60% | 2.8 mi | |
| Montera Elementary | Public | Solid | 26% | 48% | 2.1 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 Chino Valley Unified.
District information →School website →Schools across the K–12 journey
Elementary · K–5
Middle · 6–8
High school · 9–12
The road from this school ends at Don Antonio Lugo High, which sent 18 graduates to UC campuses last fall and teaches 18 AP subjects. Those numbers describe past cohorts — a child starting here today would reach Don Antonio Lugo High around 2035, and 10 years is a long time for a school to hold still, and by the state's 2023 count 64% of Don Antonio Lugo High's graduates enrolled in college somewhere, UC or not.
18 UC enrollees (fall 2025) · 18 AP subjects taught → full record on Don Antonio Lugo 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 how the school challenges kids who clear the standard early. The gap between meeting and exceeding is where pacing shows.
- 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.
Questions
Frequently asked questions
Is E. J. Marshall Elementary a good elementary school?
E. J. Marshall Elementary has a Scope Score of 40 out of 100, placing it in the 60th percentile of California elementary schools and ranked #2,299 statewide. 19.8% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is near 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 E. J. Marshall Elementary's CAASPP test scores?
On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 47.5% of students at E. J. Marshall Elementary met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 19.8% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 27.7% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 19.8% 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. 334 student-subject combinations were assessed.
How does E. J. Marshall Elementary rank in California?
E. J. Marshall Elementary ranks #2,299 among California elementary schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 60th 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 E. J. Marshall Elementary getting better or worse?
SchoolScope follows the same cohort of students across grades rather than comparing two different grades in the same year. At E. J. Marshall Elementary that cohort is 2023 G3 → 2025 G5, measured in SBAC scale-score points. Its gain ranks average among California elementary schools — roughly the 54th 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 E. J. Marshall Elementary?
15.2% of students at E. J. Marshall Elementary are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), which is better than the California average of 17.9%. The suspension rate is 0.3%, 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 E. J. Marshall Elementary compare to other schools in Chino?
E. J. Marshall Elementary scores 40/100 (60th 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 417 students. Use the schools in Chino page or the map view to compare all elementary schools nearby.
How does E. J. Marshall Elementary serve low-income and underrepresented students?
At E. J. Marshall Elementary in Chino, 48.7% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 53.9% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. E. J. Marshall Elementary trails its district average for low-income students by 5.2 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (37.8% Math proficient); Hispanic students (48.4% ELA proficient). Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 199 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 E. J. Marshall Elementary feed into?
By attendance boundary, E. J. Marshall Elementary is zoned to Ramona Junior High. 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
The 6 things our score weighs
The school's returning cohort — mostly, not exactly, the same kids two years on — gained 76 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 | 19.8% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 47.5% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Average | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 15.2% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 0.3% | 1.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 9.3% | 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
E. J. Marshall Elementary: reading the evidence
E. J. Marshall posts 48% meeting the standard against 43% statewide — ahead of most, with real headroom above the bar.
Subject proficiency describes tested students, while graduation describes a graduating cohort. These figures are not successive stages followed by the same students.
This label means the data doesn't clearly sort the school one way or the other — ask what the school is proud of, and what it's working on.
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.
E. J. Marshall Elementary is ranked #2,299 statewide · #16 of 24 in Chino Valley Unified.
01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
| Factor | School | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 19.8% | 21.4% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 47.5% | 42.7% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5) | Average | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 15.2% | 17.9% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 0.3% | 1.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 9.3% | 18.0% | 5% |
- Exceeded standard
- ↓ vs CA 21.4% · index 48 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Met or exceeded
- ↑ vs CA 42.7% · index 54 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint
- Growth (2023 G3 → 2025 G5)
- ↑ vs CA average · 54th pctile
- Chronic absenteeism
- ↑ vs CA 17.9% · index 54 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · ▼ 5.5pp lower vs 2024
- Suspension rate
- ↑ vs CA 1.6% · index 61 · 50 = CA elementary-school midpoint · → no change vs 2024
- EL proficiency (ELPAC)
- ↓ vs CA 18.0% · index 39 · 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 | 56 | 25% | 27% | 25% | 23% | 52% | +9 |
| Grade 4 | 47 | 23% | 26% | 21% | 30% | 49% | +4 |
| Grade 5 | 62 | 29% | 27% | 23% | 21% | 56% | +9 |
| Grade 6 | 52 | 15% | 29% | 17% | 38% | 44% | −2 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 56 | 16% | 32% | 18% | 34% | 48% | +3 |
| Grade 4 | 48 | 8% | 38% | 31% | 23% | 46% | +5 |
| Grade 5 | 65 | 17% | 17% | 25% | 42% | 34% | −1 |
| Grade 6 | 52 | 12% | 19% | 23% | 46% | 31% | −4 |
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 | 65 | 5% | 25% | 60% | 11% |
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 | 199 | 48.7% | −5 | +11 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 184 | 48.4% | −3 | +10 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E. J. Marshall Elementary ← | — | 40 | 19.8% | 47.5% | −4.8pp | +76 pts | 0.3% |
| Monte Vista Elementary | 2.5 mi | 61 | 33.3% | 57.8% | −2.0pp | — | 0.1% |
| Edwin Rhodes Elementary | 2.8 mi | 55 | 35.9% | 60.1% | −3.0pp | — | 2.1% |
| Montera Elementary | 2.1 mi | 49 | 26.3% | 47.8% | −9.7pp | — | 0.7% |
| 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 | 33 | 43 | #3145 | 14.9% | 39.5% | 8.9% | 1.5% | -15.3pp |
| 2022 | 33 | 51 | #2784 | 13.9% | 37.4% | 32.0% | 1.1% | -0.9pp |
| 2023 | 39 | 61 | #2219 | 19.4% | 44.1% | 26.0% | 1.1% | -2.2pp |
| 2024 | 32 | 37 | #3606 | 14.6% | 39.6% | 20.6% | 0.3% | -23.3pp |
| 2025 | 40 | 60 | #2299 | 19.8% | 47.5% | 15.2% | 0.3% | -4.8pp |
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 | 8.9% | 11.8% | +2.9pp |
| Male | 8.5% | 17.7% | +9.2pp |
| Asian | 6.3% | 4.8% | -1.5pp |
| Black/African American | 50.0% | — | — |
| Hispanic/Latino | 7.8% | 15.6% | +7.8pp |
| White | 5.3% | 8.0% | +2.7pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 7.7% | 28.2% | +20.5pp |
| English Learners | 9.5% | 14.8% | +5.3pp |
| Foster Youth | 0.0% | 15.4% | +15.4pp |
| Homeless | 12.7% | 13.8% | +1.1pp |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 9.6% | 15.4% | +5.8pp |
| All Students | 8.7% | 14.9% | +6.2pp |
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 | +13 | 148 | Accelerated | +3 | 148 | Average |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | +11 | 137 | Accelerated | +3 | 137 | Average |
| Hispanic or Latino | +13 | 126 | Accelerated | +3 | 126 | Average |
| English Only | +13 | 100 | not categorised | +1 | 100 | not categorised |
| English Learner | +7 | 35 | Accelerated | +7 | 35 | Accelerated |
| Students with Disabilities | −12 | 28 | Moderate | −12 | 28 | Moderate |
| English Learners Only | −6 | 22 | not categorised | +5 | 22 | not categorised |
| Homeless Youth | +2 | 21 | Average | −7 | 21 | Moderate |
| Recently Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only | +28 | 13 | not categorised | +7 | 13 | not categorised |
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/e-j-marshall-elementary-5513"
width="100%" height="210" loading="lazy"
style="border:0;border-radius:12px"
title="E. J. Marshall Elementary — 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