ExploreMapCompareBlogSign in
G. M. Walters Middle · Fremont

G. M. Walters Middle: Most kids here clear the bar, year after year. The question is what happens after that.

G. M. Walters posts 51% meeting the standard, and 28.6% going well past it. Most kids here keep up. Fewer get pushed further. Ask the school what it does for a child who already finds the work easy.

39600 Logan Drive, 94538 (opens in new tab)·Fremont Unified·Fremont·Grades 6-8·1,149 students·46% low-income·2024–25 CAASPP·(510) 656-7211·Website
2022–2025 trend · CDE CAASPP
This schoolCA avg
Scope4743
% Exceeded29%17%
% Met+51%39%
Growth+2.5+1.5
Absence15.8%18.5%
Suspension6.3%3.7%
Scope Score
47
🌱 Building Momentum · Developing
ranked #761 statewide · #5 of 6 in Fremont Unified

G. M. Walters Middle scores 47 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 66th percentile of 2,238 California middle schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).

Measures test performance, attendance, and climate — not arts, community, or your kid. How we score →

🌱 Building Momentum — 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.

Most rating sites would stop at “51% proficient” and call it done. G. M. Walters deserves a closer read. The school sits in Fremont, where two in five students qualify for free or reduced lunch — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.

The seven-year arc

Percentile among 2,238 middle schools statewide

Has stayed near the 66th percentile since 2022.

CA Dashboard
ELAYellow(Declined Significantly)MathGreen(Increased Significantly)
ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
Grade20192022202320242025
Grade 657%60%61%55%
Grade 762%64%52%62%60%
Grade 868%59%59%55%62%
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
Grade20192022202320242025
Grade 640%48%49%44%
Grade 747%45%38%48%44%
Grade 849%31%35%32%42%

The story this school is actually telling

The school, grade by grade

ELA · CAASPP 2024–25

Different students, same year — each bar is one grade's proficiency mix.

22%
32%
46%
Grade 6 · 54% proficient
31%
29%
40%
Grade 7 · 60% proficient
31%
31%
38%
Grade 8 · 62% proficient

The honest read: the share exceeding rises 8.7pp across grades; the floor rises 7.2pp. The state average falls 0.5pp over the same span. Kids here gain ground the longer they stay — the pattern you want to see. A school visit and conversation with teachers will tell you more than this number.

The 6 things our score weighs

Exceeded standard
28.6%
State 16.8%
11.8pp above state avg
Growth (G6→G8)
+2.5pp
State +1.5pp
Scores improve across grades
Met or exceeded
50.9%
State 39.3%
11.6pp above state avg
Chronic absenteeism
15.8%
State 18.5%
2.7pp below state avg
Suspension rate
6.3%
State 3.7%
2.6pp above state avg
EL proficiency (ELPAC)
15.9%
State 18.0%
2.0pp below state avg
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 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 G. M. Walters Middle in Fremont, 39.9% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 48.4% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. G. M. Walters Middle trails its district average for low-income students by 8.5 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (21.9% Math proficient); Asian students (77.8% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 50.7 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 511 students tested.

All students at this school: 51% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 51%, district —, state 39%51%
MaleMale: this school 48%, district 70%, state 42%48% · −3 vs school
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 31%, district 44%, state 32%31% · −20 vs school
FemaleFemale: this school 54%, district 72%, state 44%54% · +3 vs school
AsianAsian: this school 72%, district 84%, state 72%72% · +21 vs school
Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino: this school 24%, district 31%, state 32%24% · −27 vs school
English LearnersEnglish Learners: this school 7%, district 18%, state 11%7% · −44 vs school
Students with DisabilitiesStudents with Disabilities: this school 14%, district 21%, state 15%14% · −37 vs school
WhiteWhite: this school 49%, district 56%, state 56%49% · −2 vs school
FilipinoFilipino: this school 62%, district 66%, state 65%62% · +11 vs school
Two or More RacesTwo or More Races: this school 37%, district 61%, state 56%37% · −14 vs school
Black/African AmericanBlack/African American: this school 46%, district 32%, state 26%46% · −5 vs school
HomelessHomeless: too few students to report‹11
American Indian/Alaska NativeAmerican Indian/Alaska Native: too few students to report‹11
Pacific IslanderPacific Islander: too few students to report‹11
Military-ConnectedMilitary-Connected: too few students to report‹11
this school district, same group California, same group
Subgroup growth by grade

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 rises by 12.3pp from grade 6 to grade 8 at this school. District average: +5.3pp.

Showing up, and staying in class

Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 15.8%, district 12.4%, state 18.5%15.8% · −2.7pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 6.3%, district —, state 3.7%6.3% · +2.6pp vs state
Chronic absenteeism by grade band
Grades 4–612.2%
Grades 7–817.6%

Where the path goes

The path below follows attendance boundaries — scores shown for each next step.

K-12 Feeder Path

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

Context — never part of the Scope Score
Student : teacherStudent to teacher ratio: this school 21:1, district 25:121:1
Teaching staff58 teachers
Avg. experience11.6 years
Fully credentialed85%
First-year teachers10%
Salary Schedule
Teacher salary schedule$84,804 – $147,673
Principal salary$181,946 – $224,157
Superintendent salary$367,102

Pay is set by the district, not the school.

What gets spent here

Per-pupil spendingPer-pupil spending: $16,277, CA average $14,815$16,277 · spent at this school
Federal share$1,041 per student

$1,041 per student arrives as federal Title funding — a measure of concentrated need, not school quality.

District current expense · FY 2024–25$16,597 per student

The district's current expense of education per student, from CDE's annual SACS filing — the freshest district spending figure the state publishes.

Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction64%
Instruction support11%
Student services9%
Administration5%
Buildings & maintenance9%
Other2%

District-level, from the district's own SACS general-ledger filing — school-by-school breakdowns aren't published by the state.

district detail, 2016–2020 — the newest published
2020$11,623 per pupil
2019$11,438 per pupil
2018$11,629 per pupil
2017$11,018 per pupil
2016$10,331 per pupil

Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →

The neighborhood it serves

Asian45.3%
District 64.4% · CA 10.2%
Hispanic31.4%
District 16.4% · CA 56.1%
Other11.7%
District 10.1% · CA 9.0%
White9.0%
District 7.3% · CA 19.9%
Black2.6%
District 1.8% · CA 4.8%
Low IncomeFree/reduced lunch eligible 46.0% (18pp below CA avg)
Neighborhood — American Community Survey
Median income$147K · CA $85K
Median home value$1.14M · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+55% · CA 35%
ZIP population67,781
Median age37 years

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2024) · ZIP-level

Worth Knowing

On the state's science test (CAST), 41% met or exceeded the standard — science is tested in grades 5 and 8 but never enters the Scope Score.

Frequently asked questions

Is G. M. Walters Middle a good middle school?

G. M. Walters Middle has a Scope Score of 47 out of 100, placing it in the 66th percentile of California middle schools and ranked #761 statewide. 28.6% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is 11.8 percentage points above the California average of 16.8%. The Scope Score weights 6 dimensions for middle schools: exceeded standard (38%), grade 6-to-8 growth (27%), met or exceeded (proficient) (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 G. M. Walters Middle's CAASPP test scores?

On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 50.9% of students at G. M. Walters Middle met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 28.6% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 22.3% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 28.6% pushed past it. Most rating sites report only the combined "proficient" number. SchoolScope surfaces the exceeded-vs-met split because it reveals whether a school's curriculum challenges students beyond minimum proficiency or paces toward it. 2,196 student-subject combinations were assessed.

How does G. M. Walters Middle rank in California?

G. M. Walters Middle ranks #761 among California middle schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 66th percentile. This ranking is based on a weighted composite of 2025 CAASPP test performance (exceeded and met rates), grade-level growth (Grade 6 to grade 8 growth), 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 G. M. Walters Middle getting better or worse?

Based on 2025 CAASPP data, proficiency at G. M. Walters Middle increases by 2.5 percentage points from Grade 6 to grade 8 growth. This upward trajectory suggests the school is adding measurable value — students leave with higher proficiency rates than they entered with. Growth trajectory is weighted at 15% in the middle Scope Score because it measures what the school does, not just who walks in the door.

What is the attendance and school culture like at G. M. Walters Middle?

15.8% of students at G. M. Walters Middle are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), which is better than the California average of 18.5%. The suspension rate is 6.3%. 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 G. M. Walters Middle compare to other schools in Fremont?

G. M. Walters Middle scores 47/100 (66th percentile) among California middle 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 1,149 students. Use the schools in Fremont page or the map view to compare all middle schools nearby.

How does G. M. Walters Middle serve low-income and underrepresented students?

At G. M. Walters Middle in Fremont, 39.9% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 48.4% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. G. M. Walters Middle trails its district average for low-income students by 8.5 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (21.9% Math proficient); Asian students (77.8% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 50.7 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 511 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.

Your other options

Private alternatives nearby

Private schools within ~10 miles. These schools do not participate in state testing and cannot be scored or ranked.


For the data nerds

Every number on this page

Score factors, grade-level breakdowns, subgroup proficiency, and peer comparisons.

01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
Exceeded standard · 38%
28.6%
↑ vs CA 16.8% · 63th pctile
Growth (G6→G8) · 27%
+2.5pp
↑ vs CA +1.5pp · 40th pctile
Met or exceeded · 20%
50.9%
↑ vs CA 39.3% · 59th pctile
Chronic absenteeism · 5%
15.8%
↑ vs CA 18.5% · 54th pctile
Suspension rate · 5%
6.3%
↓ vs CA 3.7% · 39th pctile
EL proficiency (ELPAC) · 5%
15.9%
↓ vs CA 18.0% · 43th pctile
02By grade & subgroupCAASPP 2024–25 · % of tested students
ELATestedEXCMETNEARNOTMET++/CA
Grade 635222%32%20%25%55%+8
Grade 736331%29%18%23%60%+12
Grade 836931%31%18%20%62%+16
MathTestedEXCMETNEARNOTMET++/CA
Grade 636426%18%24%32%44%+9
Grade 736631%13%17%39%44%+10
Grade 838230%12%18%40%42%+9
Science (CAST)TestedEXCMETNEARNOT
Grade 5/8/1138121%20%41%18%

CAST is tested in grades 5, 8, and once in high school — not annually. Not part of the Scope Score.

Subgroup · ELATestedMET+vs districtvs CA
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged51139.9%−9+2
Asian48377.8%−7+3
Hispanic/Latino34434.9%−3−4
03Peer comparison · nearest middle schoolssorted by Scope Score
SchoolDistScopeEXCMET+GrowthSusp
G. M. Walters Middle ←4728.6%50.9%+2.56.3%
John M. Horner Middle1.3 mi7657.2%78.9%−4.13.3%
Thornton Middle2.1 mi7453.4%76.9%+1.77.7%
Centerville Middle1.5 mi5937.9%60.9%−1.67.3%
California average4316.8%39.3%+1.53.7%
04More measurescontext · not all part of the Scope Score
YearScopePctileRankExcMet+AbsentSuspGrowth
20224672#60225.2%49.3%18.7%6.2%-3.3pp
20235071#63326.8%48.7%18.7%6.5%-7.3pp
20244567#72526.7%50.9%13.6%7.0%-11.4pp
20254766#76128.6%50.9%15.8%6.3%+2.5pp
05Climate by student groupchronic absenteeism · 2019 vs 2025 — the two years CDE publishes at subgroup level
Group20192025Δ
Female7.9%16.5%+8.6pp
Male9.2%15.3%+6.1pp
Asian4.0%8.2%+4.2pp
Black/African American15.0%31.3%+16.3pp
White6.5%11.8%+5.3pp
Hispanic/Latino12.8%25.3%+12.5pp
Two or More Races9.7%6.8%-2.9pp
Students with Disabilities15.3%23.8%+8.5pp
English Learners11.4%22.6%+11.2pp
Homeless33.3%50.0%+16.7pp
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged11.9%21.8%+9.9pp
All Students8.6%15.8%+7.2pp
Filipino30.0%
EXC = exceeded standard · MET+ = met or exceeded ("proficient") · Source: CA Dept. of Education · CAASPP 2024–25 · n=2,238 middle schools · Vintages: climate subgroups 2019+2025 · district finance per its label · ACS 2022 · Data updated 2026-07-03methodology · data updates · CSV · report issue

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