Jordan Elementary: The score is strong. The trajectory is stronger.
Jordan pairs 50% proficiency with gains that hold up when the same students are tracked two years apart — the rare school that posts both.
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 52 | 22% | 50% | +10.0 | 12.9% | 1.0% |
| CA average · Elementary School | 45 | 21% | 43% | -2.9 | 17.9% | 1.6% |
Jordan Elementary scores 52 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 70th 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 →
🚀 Growth Engine — Ask how the school tracks each kid's growth year to year, and what happens when a kid stalls instead of gaining.
Most rating sites would stop at “50% proficient” and call it done. Jordan deserves a closer read. The school sits in Whittier, where three in five students qualify for free or reduced lunch — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.
Jordan's low-income kids hit 53.9% 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
Climbed from the 58th to the 70th percentile since 2022 — past roughly 700 elementary schools.
| Grade | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 43% | 58% | 45% | 41% |
| Grade 4 | 47% | 61% | 53% | 60% |
| Grade 5 | 51% | 52% | 49% | 58% |
| Grade 6 | 38% | 53% | 62% | 63% |
| Grade | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 42% | 44% | 45% | 43% |
| Grade 4 | 37% | 46% | 42% | 52% |
| Grade 5 | 31% | 31% | 47% | 46% |
| Grade 6 | 40% | 39% | 44% | 49% |
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 rises 12.3pp across grades; the floor rises 16.9pp. The state average rises 4.5pp 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.
Jordan's most underrated number
53.9% 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 what changed — new curriculum, new principal, new program. Momentum has a cause, and a visit will find it.
- 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 Jordan Elementary in Whittier, 53.9% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 53.3% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Jordan Elementary outperforms its district average for low-income students by 0.6 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (44.4% Math proficient); Hispanic students (52.1% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 3.6 percentage points for hispanic students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 152 students tested.
9 of 14 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 rises by 19.5pp from grade 3 to grade 5 at this school. District average: +4.1pp.
Showing up, and staying in class
Grades 4–6 students miss school at roughly three times the rate of TK/K students (19.3% vs 6.8%). Chronic absence here concentrates in the upper grades.
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
$139 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
Transitional kindergarten is offered here — confirmed by actual Census Day enrollment, not just the listed grade span.
On the state's science test (CAST), 37% met or exceeded the standard — science is tested in grades 5 and 8 but never enters the Scope Score.
Frequently asked questions
Is Jordan Elementary a good elementary school?
What are Jordan Elementary's CAASPP test scores?
How does Jordan Elementary rank in California?
Is Jordan Elementary getting better or worse?
What is the attendance and school culture like at Jordan Elementary?
How does Jordan Elementary compare to other schools in Whittier?
How does Jordan Elementary serve low-income and underrepresented students?
Your other options
Nearby Elementary Schools
3 within ~3 mi · avg 65
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 | 54 | 15% | 26% | 28% | 31% | 41% | −3 |
| Grade 4 | 62 | 32% | 27% | 16% | 24% | 60% | +15 |
| Grade 5 | 59 | 27% | 31% | 29% | 14% | 58% | +10 |
| Grade 6 | 56 | 36% | 27% | 16% | 21% | 63% | +16 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 3 | 54 | 11% | 31% | 31% | 26% | 43% | −3 |
| Grade 4 | 64 | 22% | 30% | 23% | 25% | 52% | +10 |
| Grade 5 | 59 | 27% | 19% | 25% | 29% | 46% | +10 |
| Grade 6 | 55 | 25% | 24% | 25% | 25% | 49% | +14 |
| Science (CAST) | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 5/8/11 | 59 | 10% | 27% | 59% | 3% |
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 | 152 | 53.9% | +1 | +16 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 194 | 52.1% | −5 | +13 |
| School | Dist | Scope | EXC | MET+ | Growth | Susp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Elementary ← | — | 52 | 22.4% | 49.7% | +10.0 | 1.0% |
| Murphy Ranch Elementary | 0.7 mi | 69 | 44.0% | 71.1% | +4.5 | 1.3% |
| Leffingwell Elementary | 0.7 mi | 64 | 47.7% | 71.5% | −7.3 | 0.6% |
| Meadow Green Elementary | 1.2 mi | 62 | 40.0% | 67.6% | −15.5 | 0.9% |
| California average | — | 45 | 21.3% | 42.7% | −2.9 | 1.6% |
| Year | Scope | Pctile | Rank | Exc | Met+ | Absent | Susp | Growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 39 | 58 | #2420 | 15.5% | 41.9% | 15.7% | 2.0% | -1.6pp |
| 2023 | 44 | 62 | #2202 | 19.4% | 48.6% | 20.3% | 1.3% | -9.2pp |
| 2024 | 50 | 69 | #1797 | 23.3% | 46.8% | 13.6% | 1.1% | +3.4pp |
| 2025 | 52 | 70 | #1711 | 22.4% | 49.7% | 12.9% | 1.0% | +10.0pp |
| Group | 2019 | 2025 | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | — | 11.8% | — |
| Male | — | 13.4% | — |
| Asian | — | 18.2% | — |
| Filipino | — | 18.2% | — |
| Hispanic/Latino | — | 12.6% | — |
| Students with Disabilities | — | 16.7% | — |
| English Learners | — | 21.6% | — |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | — | 16.9% | — |
| All Students | — | 12.5% | — |
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