Math
46%Grades 6 & 8 · Proficient or Advanced
Public middle school
Robert C. Cooley Middle
Most kids here clear the bar, year after year. The question is what happens after that.
65% of tested students are Proficient or Advanced in English and 46% 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
English
65%Grades 6 & 8 · Proficient or Advanced
Students
1,149Total enrollment
Chronic absence
11%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 6 & 8 · 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 | 51% | 58% |
| 2022 | 53% | 61% |
| 2023 | 47% | 57% |
| 2024 | 48% | 60% |
| 2025 | 46% | 65% |
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
26%ProficientStandard Met
20%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
27%MinimalStandard Not Met
27%AdvancedStandard Exceeded
28%ProficientStandard Met
37%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
19%MinimalStandard Not Met
16%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
Has held the 77th-percentile line every tested year since 2019.
Most rating sites would stop at “56% proficient” and call it done. Robert C. Cooley deserves a closer read. One in three of its students qualify for free or reduced lunch (California: 64%) — and reading the numbers without that context misreads the school.
Robert C. Cooley's low-income kids hit 51.6% 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.
1114 tested · 3 of 3 grades published · cohort of 298 tracked
Robert C. Cooley Middle scores 50 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 77th percentile of 2,177 California middle schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
Proficiency here is back to its pre-pandemic level — 56% meet the standard, about where the school stood in 2019.
Percentile among 2,177 middle schools statewide
ELAGreen(Maintained)MathYellow(Maintained)
ShowHide the by-grade tables, year by year
ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 56% | 63% | 60% | 61% | 62% |
| Grade 7 | 69% | 69% | 59% | 67% | 65% |
| Grade 8 | 59% | 58% | 55% | 58% | 67% |
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 46% | 52% | 50% | 49% | 45% |
| Grade 7 | 51% | 49% | 51% | 50% | 53% |
| Grade 8 | 55% | 54% | 44% | 47% | 46% |
Where students land · CAASPP 2024–25
More than half of students here meet the standard. One in four clear it by a lot.
ELA65% met or exceeded
Exceeded 28%Met 37%Nearly Met 18%Not Met 17%
Math48% met or exceeded
Exceeded 28%Met 20%Nearly Met 26%Not Met 26%
Exceeded Met Nearly Met Not Met
California middle schools · average17% exceeded · 40% met or exceeded
This school against the California average
2019–2025 trend · CDE CAASPP
| Scope | % Exceeded | % Met+ | Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8) | Absence | Suspension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This school | 50 | 28% | 56% | Below avg · p45 | 11.4% | 1.9% |
| CA average · Middle School | 39 | 17% | 40% | Average · p50 | 18.1% | 3.6% |
This schoolCA avg
Scope5039
% Exceeded28%17%
% Met+56%40%
Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8)Below avg · p45Average · p50
Absence11.4%18.1%
Suspension1.9%3.6%
California’s growth results and student groups
State growth model · CDE growth model 2024–25
Our growth read and California's own model disagree here — the 45th percentile against the state's 61st.
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 here the two measures disagree. Ours puts this school around the 45th percentile of California middle schools; the state's puts it around the 61st in reading and math together — a better read than ours. We are not going to pretend one of those is the answer. Neither measure sees an individual child's classroom, and a disagreement this size is worth asking the principal about directly.
— 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 middle school lands at −1 in reading, and the middle half of them fall between −8 and +6 — 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 6
23%
exceeded standard · 60% met or exceeded
ELA · 2025 · Grade 8
27%
exceeded standard · 67% met or exceeded
n = 298
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, G6→G8SchoolScope growth measure: 45th percentile among California middle schools.45th pctile
State model · readingmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, reading: +4 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 60th percentile of 7,519 reported schools.60th pctile · +4 pts
State model · mathmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, math: +5 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 63rd percentile of 7,518 reported schools.63rd pctile · +5 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.
51.6% 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: 56% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 56%, district —, state 40%56%
MaleMale: this school 54%, district 54%, state 42%54% · −2 vs school
FemaleFemale: this school 59%, district 56%, state 44%59% · +2 vs school
WhiteWhite: this school 58%, district 58%, state 56%58% · +1 vs school
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 42%, district 42%, state 32%42% · −14 vs school
Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino: this school 49%, district 44%, state 32%49% · −7 vs school
AsianAsian: this school 65%, district 64%, state 72%65% · +9 vs school
Two or More RacesTwo or More Races: this school 54%, district 56%, state 56%54% · −2 vs school
Students with DisabilitiesStudents with Disabilities: this school 17%, district 28%, state 15%17% · −40 vs school
FilipinoFilipino: this school 68%, district 71%, state 65%68% · +12 vs school
Black/African AmericanBlack/African American: this school 37%, district 40%, state 26%37% · −20 vs school
English LearnersEnglish Learners: this school 4%, district 16%, state 11%4% · −52 vs school
5 of 17 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 7.5pp from grade 6 to grade 8 at this school. District average: -4.5pp.
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 middle school — not against zero, and not against this school's all-students figure, because the state's expectation already differs by group.
Reading
English Only837 studentsEnglish Only, reading: +3 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 837 students.+3 pts · +3 vs typical
White473 studentsWhite, reading: +3 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 473 students.+3 pts · +3 vs typical
Low-income students361 studentsLow-income students, reading: +3 scale-score points versus expectation, against −3 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 361 students.+3 pts · +6 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students203 studentsHispanic or Latino students, reading: +4 scale-score points versus expectation, against −2 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 203 students.+4 pts · +6 vs typical
Asian120 studentsAsian, reading: +10 scale-score points versus expectation, against +6 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 120 students.+10 pts · +4 vs typical
Math
English Only839 studentsEnglish Only, math: +5 scale-score points versus expectation, against −3 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 839 students.+5 pts · +8 vs typical
White475 studentsWhite, math: +5 scale-score points versus expectation, against +1 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 475 students.+5 pts · +4 vs typical
Low-income students362 studentsLow-income students, math: +2 scale-score points versus expectation, against −5 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 362 students.+2 pts · +7 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students203 studentsHispanic or Latino students, math: +6 scale-score points versus expectation, against −6 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 203 students.+6 pts · +12 vs typical
Asian120 studentsAsian, math: +10 scale-score points versus expectation, against +17 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 120 students.+10 pts · −7 vs typical
this school typical California middle school, same group| the centre tick is 0 = as predicted
— 1 more group is 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 24 students for every teacher here.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Students per teacher24 · district 22
Teaching staff50 teachers
Avg. experience16.2 years
Fully credentialed86%
First-year teachers4%
PrincipalSusanna Ramirez
ShowHide what the district pays
Teacher salary schedule$54,157 – $123,056
Principal salaryFrom $150,797
Superintendent salary$326,000
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.
Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 11.4%, district 10.7%, state 18.1%11.4% · −6.7pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 1.9%, district —, state 3.6%1.9% · −1.7pp vs state
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
ShowHide attendance by student group and by grade
Chronic absenteeism by grade band
Grades 4–610.3%
Grades 7–811.8%
Resources & neighborhood
What sits behind the school experience?
Explore school spending and the district budget
What gets spent · FY 2024–25
It spends $12,171 per student, less than the California average.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
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.
$602 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: $12,171, CA average $14,491$12,171 · spent at this school
Federal share$602 per student
District current expense · FY 2024–25$14,727 per student
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction 67%Instruction support 8%Student services 11%Administration 6%Buildings & maintenance 8%
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$11,769 per pupil
2019$13,082 per pupil
2018$11,431 per pupil
2017$11,104 per pupil
2016$11,047 per pupil
Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →
The neighborhood · ACS 2024
One in three 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), 45% 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 Latino20.1% · district 25.1% · CA 56.1%
White45.6% · district 44.2% · CA 19.9%
Asian11.8% · district 11.1% · CA 10.2%
Black4.1% · district 2.9% · CA 4.8%
Other18.4% · district 16.6% · CA 9.0%
Free or reduced lunch35.8% · CA 64%
Median income$137K · CA $85K
Median home value$688K · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+47% · CA 35%
ZIP population83,902
Median age40 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.
Find contact and visit details →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 · middle 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robert C. Cooley Middle | Public | Strong | 28% | 56% | School being viewed | |
| Barbara Chilton Middle | Public | Strong | 32% | 64% | 2.3 mi | |
| Silverado Middle | Public | Solid | 23% | 50% | 2.5 mi | |
| George A. Buljan Middle | Public | Developing | 16% | 43% | 1.9 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.
5 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 Roseville City.
District information →Schools across the K–12 journey
Elementary · K–5
William Kaseberg ElementaryPublished boundary overlapScope Score 57/100
Bradford Woodbridge Fundamental ElementaryPublished boundary overlapScope Score 26/100
Diamond Creek ElementaryPublished boundary overlapScope Score 50/100
Blue Oaks ElementaryPublished boundary overlapScope Score 52/100
Vencil Brown ElementaryAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 48/100
Thomas Jefferson ElementaryAlternative · verify enrollment routeScope Score 42/100
Middle · 6–8
High school · 9–12
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 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 Robert C. Cooley Middle a good middle school?
Robert C. Cooley Middle has a Scope Score of 50 out of 100, placing it in the 77th percentile of California middle schools and ranked #490 statewide. 28.0% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is 10.8 percentage points above the California average of 17.2%. The Scope Score weights 6 dimensions for middle schools: exceeded standard (42%), met or exceeded (proficient) (23%), grade 6-to-8 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 Robert C. Cooley Middle's CAASPP test scores?
On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 56.5% of students at Robert C. Cooley Middle met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 28.0% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 28.5% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 28.0% 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. 2,233 student-subject combinations were assessed.
How does Robert C. Cooley Middle rank in California?
Robert C. Cooley Middle ranks #490 among California middle schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 77th percentile. This ranking is based on a weighted composite of 2025 CAASPP test performance (exceeded and met rates), same-cohort growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8), 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 Robert C. Cooley Middle getting better or worse?
SchoolScope follows the same cohort of students across grades rather than comparing two different grades in the same year. At Robert C. Cooley Middle that cohort is 2023 G6 → 2025 G8, measured in SBAC scale-score points. Its gain ranks below avg among California middle schools — roughly the 45th percentile, behind 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 middle 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 Robert C. Cooley Middle?
11.4% of students at Robert C. Cooley Middle are chronically absent (missing 10% or more of school days), which is better than the California average of 18.1%. The suspension rate is 1.9%, 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 Robert C. Cooley Middle compare to other schools in Roseville?
Robert C. Cooley Middle scores 50/100 (77th 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 Roseville page or the map view to compare all middle schools nearby.
How does Robert C. Cooley Middle serve low-income and underrepresented students?
At Robert C. Cooley Middle in Roseville, 51.6% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 46.1% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Robert C. Cooley Middle outperforms its district average for low-income students by 5.5 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (32.8% Math proficient); White students (65.7% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 62.0 percentage points for english learner students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 399 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.
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 42 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 | 28.0% | 17.2% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 56.5% | 40.0% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8) | Below avg | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 11.4% | 18.1% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 1.9% | 3.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 19.1% | 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
Robert C. Cooley Middle: reading the evidence
Robert C. Cooley posts 56% meeting the standard, and 28.0% 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.
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.
Robert C. Cooley Middle is ranked #490 statewide · #3 of 4 in Roseville City.
01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
| Factor | School | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 28.0% | 17.2% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 56.5% | 40.0% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8) | Below avg | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 11.4% | 18.1% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 1.9% | 3.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 19.1% | 18.0% | 5% |
- Exceeded standard
- ↑ vs CA 17.2% · index 62 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint
- Met or exceeded
- ↑ vs CA 40.0% · index 64 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint
- Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8)
- ↓ vs CA average · 45th pctile
- Chronic absenteeism
- ↑ vs CA 18.1% · index 60 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint · ▲ 1.1pp higher vs 2024
- Suspension rate
- ↑ vs CA 3.6% · index 57 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint · ▼ 0.6pp lower vs 2024
- EL proficiency (ELPAC)
- ↑ vs CA 18.0% · index 47 · 50 = CA middle-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 6 | 382 | 29% | 34% | 20% | 17% | 62% | +16 |
| Grade 7 | 367 | 28% | 37% | 17% | 19% | 65% | +17 |
| Grade 8 | 365 | 27% | 40% | 18% | 15% | 67% | +21 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 383 | 25% | 21% | 27% | 27% | 45% | +11 |
| Grade 7 | 371 | 32% | 21% | 25% | 23% | 53% | +19 |
| Grade 8 | 365 | 27% | 19% | 26% | 27% | 46% | +14 |
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 | 365 | 19% | 26% | 47% | 8% |
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 | 399 | 51.6% | +5 | +13 |
| White | 504 | 65.7% | +5 | +4 |
| Hispanic/Latino | 218 | 59.6% | +11 | +21 |
03Nearest middle 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robert C. Cooley Middle ← | — | 50 | 28.0% | 56.5% | +2.9pp | +42 pts | 1.9% |
| Barbara Chilton Middle | 2.3 mi | 52 | 31.5% | 63.8% | −6.0pp | — | 3.4% |
| Silverado Middle | 2.5 mi | 43 | 22.8% | 50.1% | +3.3pp | — | 3.3% |
| George A. Buljan Middle | 1.9 mi | 30 | 15.8% | 42.7% | −15.4pp | — | 5.8% |
| California average | — | 39 | 17.2% | 40.0% | +1.5pp | — | 3.6% |
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 | 50 | 75 | #483 | 23.3% | 56.1% | 5.6% | 2.3% | +6.2pp |
| 2022 | 57 | 85 | #308 | 28.9% | 57.7% | 24.4% | 1.4% | -1.7pp |
| 2023 | 52 | 82 | #383 | 25.0% | 52.9% | 17.3% | 1.4% | -5.8pp |
| 2024 | 48 | 75 | #542 | 24.9% | 55.5% | 10.3% | 2.5% | -2.5pp |
| 2025 | 50 | 77 | #490 | 28.0% | 56.5% | 11.4% | 1.9% | +2.9pp |
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 | 4.8% | 11.4% | +6.6pp |
| Male | 6.1% | 11.1% | +5.0pp |
| Asian | 2.7% | 7.2% | +4.5pp |
| Black/African American | 22.7% | 7.8% | -14.9pp |
| Filipino | 3.7% | 5.8% | +2.1pp |
| Hispanic/Latino | 8.4% | 15.1% | +6.7pp |
| Two or More Races | 5.1% | 11.3% | +6.2pp |
| White | 4.0% | 11.6% | +7.6pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 10.0% | 16.8% | +6.8pp |
| English Learners | 7.1% | 13.9% | +6.8pp |
| Homeless | 16.7% | — | — |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 10.5% | 16.2% | +5.7pp |
| All Students | 5.5% | 11.3% | +5.8pp |
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 | +4 | 1,031 | Average | +5 | 1,033 | Accelerated |
| English Only | +3 | 837 | not categorised | +5 | 839 | not categorised |
| White | +3 | 473 | Average | +5 | 475 | Accelerated |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | +3 | 361 | Average | +2 | 362 | Average |
| Hispanic or Latino | +4 | 203 | Average | +6 | 203 | Accelerated |
| Asian | +10 | 120 | Accelerated | +10 | 120 | Accelerated |
| English Learner | +7 | 115 | Accelerated | +7 | 115 | Accelerated |
| Students with Disabilities | −14 | 111 | Moderate | +1 | 112 | Average |
| Two or More Races | +3 | 99 | Average | 0 | 99 | Average |
| Recently Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only | +11 | 78 | not categorised | +3 | 78 | not categorised |
| Filipino | +16 | 75 | Accelerated | +11 | 75 | Accelerated |
| Black or African American | −17 | 45 | Moderate | −1 | 45 | Average |
| English Learners Only | −6 | 37 | not categorised | +14 | 37 | not categorised |
| Long-Term English Learner (grades 6-8 only) | +3 | 17 | Average | +2 | 17 | Average |
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. Long-Term English Learner counts cover grades 6-8 only (CDE), so that row is not comparable to the All Students row. 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/robert-c-cooley-middle-7790"
width="100%" height="210" loading="lazy"
style="border:0;border-radius:12px"
title="Robert C. Cooley Middle — 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=2,177 middle 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