Mt. Gleason Middle: This school runs ahead of the state average. The bar itself is the harder conversation.
Mt. Gleason posts 42% meeting the standard against 39% statewide — ahead of most, with real headroom above the bar.
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 49 | 18% | 42% | +1.6 | 22.1% | 0.7% |
| CA average · Middle School | 43 | 17% | 39% | +1.5 | 18.5% | 3.7% |
Mt. Gleason Middle scores 49 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 70th 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 “42% proficient” and call it done. Mt. Gleason deserves a closer read. The school sits in Sunland, where four in five students qualify for free or reduced lunch — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.
The headline number: 34.3% of English learners reached the top ELPAC level, versus 18.0% statewide.
The seven-year arc
Climbed from the 33rd to the 70th percentile since 2019 — past roughly 700 middle schools.
Proficiency here is back to its pre-pandemic level — 42% meet the standard, about where the school stood in 2019.
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 51% | 42% | 40% | 44% | 49% |
| Grade 7 | 52% | 42% | 49% | 48% | 56% |
| Grade 8 | 46% | 43% | 36% | 49% | 50% |
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 39% | 24% | 24% | 27% | 31% |
| Grade 7 | 30% | 22% | 32% | 33% | 34% |
| Grade 8 | 26% | 18% | 18% | 34% | 34% |
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 holds steady across grades; the proficiency floor barely moves. The state average falls 0.5pp over the same span. A school visit and conversation with teachers will tell you more than this number.
The 6 things our score weighs
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 Mt. Gleason Middle in Sunland, 47.0% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 40.9% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Mt. Gleason Middle outperforms its district average for low-income students by 6.1 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (29.4% Math proficient); Hispanic students (40.1% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 44.3 percentage points for disabilities students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 598 students tested.
7 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 rises by 4.2pp from grade 6 to grade 8 at this school. District average: -0.3pp.
Showing up, and staying in class
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
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.
$1,765 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
On the state's science test (CAST), 34% met or exceeded the standard — science is tested in grades 5 and 8 but never enters the Scope Score.
Frequently asked questions
Is Mt. Gleason Middle a good middle school?
What are Mt. Gleason Middle's CAASPP test scores?
How does Mt. Gleason Middle rank in California?
Is Mt. Gleason Middle getting better or worse?
What is the attendance and school culture like at Mt. Gleason Middle?
How does Mt. Gleason Middle compare to other schools in Sunland?
How does Mt. Gleason Middle serve low-income and underrepresented students?
Your other options
Nearby Elementary Schools
3 within ~3 mi · avg 50
Nearby High Schools
2 within ~3 mi · avg 40
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 6 | 237 | 19% | 30% | 23% | 28% | 49% | +3 |
| Grade 7 | 244 | 21% | 35% | 16% | 28% | 56% | +8 |
| Grade 8 | 254 | 19% | 31% | 25% | 25% | 50% | +4 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 237 | 17% | 14% | 26% | 43% | 31% | −4 |
| Grade 7 | 247 | 19% | 15% | 27% | 39% | 34% | +0 |
| Grade 8 | 257 | 14% | 19% | 23% | 43% | 34% | +2 |
| Science (CAST) | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 5/8/11 | 257 | 11% | 23% | 48% | 18% |
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 | 598 | 47.0% | +6 | +9 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 392 | 40.1% | −1 | +1 |
| White | 288 | 66.0% | −3 | +4 |
| School | Dist | Scope | EXC | MET+ | Growth | Susp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mt. Gleason Middle ← | — | 49 | 18.4% | 42.4% | +1.6 | 0.7% |
| California average | — | 43 | 16.8% | 39.3% | +1.5 | 3.7% |
| Year | Scope | Pctile | Rank | Exc | Met+ | Absent | Susp | Growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 32 | 33 | #1350 | 16.0% | 40.7% | 19.3% | 0.8% | -9.0pp |
| 2022 | 35 | 45 | #1194 | 11.7% | 32.1% | 31.0% | 0.7% | -2.8pp |
| 2023 | 37 | 43 | #1253 | 12.9% | 33.1% | 28.8% | 1.8% | -5.4pp |
| 2024 | 46 | 68 | #714 | 17.7% | 39.2% | 24.9% | 4.8% | +6.0pp |
| 2025 | 49 | 70 | #662 | 18.4% | 42.4% | 22.1% | 0.7% | +1.6pp |
| Group | 2019 | 2025 | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 18.9% | 22.7% | +3.8pp |
| Male | 19.6% | 21.7% | +2.1pp |
| Asian | 3.4% | 7.7% | +4.3pp |
| Black/African American | 25.0% | — | — |
| White | 7.7% | 0.0% | -7.7pp |
| Hispanic/Latino | 18.8% | 24.5% | +5.7pp |
| Two or More Races | 50.0% | 18.2% | -31.8pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 22.8% | 29.1% | +6.3pp |
| English Learners | 12.4% | 25.6% | +13.2pp |
| Homeless | 58.6% | 52.9% | -5.7pp |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 20.9% | 23.9% | +3.0pp |
| All Students | 19.3% | 22.2% | +2.9pp |
| Filipino | — | 33.3% | — |
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