Math
72%Grades 6 & 8 · Proficient or Advanced
Public middle school
Rolling Hills Middle
High scores, healthy climate, strong attendance. We looked for a catch — we didn't find one.
78% of tested students are Proficient or Advanced in English and 72% in math. Explore the evidence alongside the opportunities your child would use.
SchoolScope archetype
Strong All-Around
What this means for your family
Ask about what we don't score — class size, electives, the feel of a classroom — strong numbers everywhere on paper don't mean every classroom feels the same.
How archetypes are assigned →Data sources · Methodology · State tests: 2025
Contact
Phone(916) 933-9290
DistrictBuckeye Union Elementary
PrincipalDebra Bowers
Grades6-8
Enrollment778 students
English
78%Grades 6 & 8 · Proficient or Advanced
Students
778Total enrollment
Chronic absence
8%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 | 72% | 79% |
| 2022 | 67% | 80% |
| 2023 | 60% | 73% |
| 2024 | 67% | 71% |
| 2025 | 72% | 78% |
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
48%ProficientStandard Met
24%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
19%MinimalStandard Not Met
9%AdvancedStandard Exceeded
40%ProficientStandard Met
39%DevelopingStandard Nearly Met
15%MinimalStandard Not Met
7%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 94th-percentile line every tested year since 2019.
Most rating sites would stop at “75% proficient” and call it done. Rolling Hills deserves a closer read. It sits at the 94th percentile of 2,177 California middle schools — but the ranking is the least interesting thing on this page.
Rolling Hills's low-income kids hit 64.0% 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.
743 tested · 3 of 3 grades published · cohort of 280 tracked
Rolling Hills Middle scores 69 of 100 on SchoolScope's Scope Score — the 94th percentile of 2,177 California middle schools (CDE CAASPP 2025).
Proficiency here is back to its pre-pandemic level — 75% meet the standard, about where the school stood in 2019.
Percentile among 2,177 middle schools statewide
ELABlue(Increased)MathBlue(Increased)
ShowHide the by-grade tables, year by year
ELA — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 78% | 78% | 76% | 70% | 79% |
| Grade 7 | 82% | 75% | 84% | 78% | 77% |
| Grade 8 | 80% | 82% | 71% | 72% | 78% |
Math — % met or exceeded, by grade
| Grade | 2019 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 77% | 71% | 65% | 67% | 74% |
| Grade 7 | 71% | 64% | 72% | 76% | 71% |
| Grade 8 | 68% | 64% | 55% | 66% | 70% |
Where students land · CAASPP 2024–25
Two-thirds of students here meet the standard. Two in five clear it by a lot.
ELA78% met or exceeded
Exceeded 40%Met 38%Nearly Met 14%Not Met 8%
Math72% met or exceeded
Exceeded 47%Met 25%Nearly Met 19%Not Met 10%
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 | 69 | 44% | 75% | Above avg · p70 | 7.7% | 2.0% |
| CA average · Middle School | 39 | 17% | 40% | Average · p50 | 18.1% | 3.6% |
This schoolCA avg
Scope6939
% Exceeded44%17%
% Met+75%40%
Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8)Above avg · p70Average · p50
Absence7.7%18.1%
Suspension2.0%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 agree — both land near the 82nd percentile of middle 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. The two measures land in the same neighbourhood here — ours puts this school around the 70th percentile of California middle schools, the state's around the 82nd in reading and math together. Two different methods agreeing is the most you can ask of one year of test data.
— 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
37%
exceeded standard · 76% met or exceeded
ELA · 2025 · Grade 8
36%
exceeded standard · 78% met or exceeded
n = 280
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: 70th percentile among California middle schools.70th pctile
State model · readingmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, reading: +8 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 73rd percentile of 7,519 reported schools.73rd pctile · +8 pts
State model · mathmatched students, grades 4-8California growth model, math: +18 scale-score points versus the state's expectation, 90th percentile of 7,518 reported schools.90th pctile · +18 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.
64.0% 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: 75% met or exceeded
All StudentsAll Students: this school 75%, district —, state 40%75%
WhiteWhite: this school 75%, district 69%, state 56%75% · +1 vs school
MaleMale: this school 74%, district 70%, state 42%74% · −0 vs school
FemaleFemale: this school 75%, district 69%, state 44%75% · +0 vs school
AsianAsian: this school 87%, district 87%, state 72%87% · +12 vs school
Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino: this school 57%, district 54%, state 32%57% · −18 vs school
Students with DisabilitiesStudents with Disabilities: this school 33%, district 33%, state 15%33% · −42 vs school
Socioeconomically DisadvantagedSocioeconomically Disadvantaged: this school 56%, district 52%, state 32%56% · −19 vs school
Two or More RacesTwo or More Races: this school 77%, district 73%, state 56%77% · +2 vs school
FilipinoFilipino: this school 88%, district 89%, state 65%88% · +13 vs school
6 of 16 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 2.4pp from grade 6 to grade 8 at this school. District average: +3.1pp.
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 Only617 studentsEnglish Only, reading: +8 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 617 students.+8 pts · +8 vs typical
White400 studentsWhite, reading: +5 scale-score points versus expectation, against 0 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 400 students.+5 pts · +5 vs typical
Asian113 studentsAsian, reading: +8 scale-score points versus expectation, against +6 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 113 students.+8 pts · +2 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students112 studentsHispanic or Latino students, reading: +7 scale-score points versus expectation, against −2 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 112 students.+7 pts · +9 vs typical
Students with disabilities80 studentsStudents with disabilities, reading: +3 scale-score points versus expectation, against −13 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 80 students.+3 pts · +16 vs typical
Math
English Only617 studentsEnglish Only, math: +16 scale-score points versus expectation, against −3 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 617 students.+16 pts · +19 vs typical
White401 studentsWhite, math: +15 scale-score points versus expectation, against +1 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 401 students.+15 pts · +14 vs typical
Asian114 studentsAsian, math: +30 scale-score points versus expectation, against +17 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 114 students.+30 pts · +13 vs typical
Hispanic or Latino students111 studentsHispanic or Latino students, math: +9 scale-score points versus expectation, against −6 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 111 students.+9 pts · +15 vs typical
Students with disabilities82 studentsStudents with disabilities, math: +13 scale-score points versus expectation, against −8 for the same group at a typical California middle school, 82 students.+13 pts · +21 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 21 students for every teacher here.
Context — never part of the Scope Score
Students per teacher21 · district 27
Teaching staff38 teachers
Avg. experience18.2 years
Fully credentialed98%
PrincipalDebra Bowers
ShowHide what the district pays
Teacher salary schedule$57,629 – $116,656
Principal salaryFrom $159,306
Superintendent salary$206,208
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.
Grades 7–8 students miss school at roughly twice the rate of Grades 4–6 students (9.1% vs 4.3%). Chronic absence here concentrates in the upper grades.
Chronic absenteeismChronic absenteeism: this school 7.7%, district 5.8%, state 18.1%7.7% · −10.4pp vs state
Suspension rateSuspension rate: this school 2.0%, district —, state 3.6%2.0% · −1.6pp vs state
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
ShowHide attendance by student group and by grade
Chronic absenteeism by grade band
Grades 4–64.3%
Grades 7–89.1%
Resources & neighborhood
What sits behind the school experience?
Explore school spending and the district budget
What gets spent · FY 2024–25
It spends $11,070 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.
$11 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: $11,070, CA average $14,491$11,070 · spent at this school
Federal share$11 per student
District current expense · FY 2024–25$14,962 per student
This schoolDistrictCalifornia
Where the district's dollars go · FY 2024–25 · CDE SACS
Instruction 64%Instruction support 8%Student services 9%Administration 9%Buildings & maintenance 10%
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$11,522 per pupil
2019$10,440 per pupil
2018$10,926 per pupil
2017$8,491 per pupil
2016$8,378 per pupil
Source: NCES F-33 · Full district breakdown →
The neighborhood · ACS 2024
One in ten 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), 65% 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 Latino16.2% · district 16.3% · CA 56.1%
White56.0% · district 64.7% · CA 19.9%
Asian15.6% · district 6.3% · CA 10.2%
Black0.8% · district 1.2% · CA 4.8%
Other11.4% · district 11.5% · CA 9.0%
Free or reduced lunch10.2% · CA 64%
Median income$165K · CA $85K
Median home value$916K · CA $659K
Bachelor's degree+61% · CA 35%
ZIP population47,657
Median age46 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Hills Middle | Public | Strong | 44% | 75% | School being viewed | |
| Pleasant Grove Middle | Public | Solid | 25% | 51% | 3.2 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.
4 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 Buckeye Union Elementary.
District information →Schools across the K–12 journey
Elementary · K–5
Middle · 6–8
High school · 9–12
Buckeye Union Mandarin Immersion Charterestimated path
The road from this school ends at Buckeye Union Mandarin Immersion Charter, which teaches 1 AP subject. That number describes past cohorts — a child starting here today would reach Buckeye Union Mandarin Immersion Charter around 2031, and 6 years is a long time for a school to hold still.
1 AP subjects taught → full record on Buckeye Union Mandarin Immersion Charter's page
Source: 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 what the school is working on next. Strong numbers tell you where a school is, not where it's going.
- Ask what changes between grade 6 and grade 8 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 Rolling Hills Middle a good middle school?
Rolling Hills Middle has a Scope Score of 69 out of 100, placing it in the 94th percentile of California middle schools and ranked #140 statewide. 43.6% of students exceeded the state standard on the 2025 CAASPP assessment, which is 26.4 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 Rolling Hills Middle's CAASPP test scores?
On the 2025 CAASPP Smarter Balanced Assessment, 74.9% of students at Rolling Hills Middle met or exceeded the state standard in ELA and Math combined, and 43.6% exceeded it. The gap between those numbers matters: 31.3% of students are at the proficiency floor, while 43.6% 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. 1,488 student-subject combinations were assessed.
How does Rolling Hills Middle rank in California?
Rolling Hills Middle ranks #140 among California middle schools by Scope Score, placing it in the 94th 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 Rolling Hills 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 Rolling Hills Middle that cohort is 2023 G6 → 2025 G8, measured in SBAC scale-score points. Its gain ranks above avg among California middle schools — roughly the 70th 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 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 Rolling Hills Middle?
7.7% of students at Rolling Hills 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 2.0%. 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 Rolling Hills Middle compare to other schools in El Dorado Hills?
Rolling Hills Middle scores 69/100 (94th 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 778 students. Use the schools in El Dorado Hills page or the map view to compare all middle schools nearby.
How does Rolling Hills Middle serve low-income and underrepresented students?
At Rolling Hills Middle in El Dorado Hills, 64.0% of low-income students met or exceeded the ELA standard in 2025, compared to 54.7% district-wide and 38.2% statewide. Rolling Hills Middle outperforms its district average for low-income students by 9.3 percentage points in ELA. Other subgroups: Low-Income students (48.7% Math proficient); White students (78.9% ELA proficient). The largest proficiency gap is 40.8 percentage points for disabilities students. Data source: California Department of Education, CAASPP 2024-25. 75 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
How far the top scorers get carries this score.
43.6% of students scored in the top band on the state test. The California average is 17.2%.
The school's returning cohort — mostly, not exactly, the same kids two years on — gained 51 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 | 43.6% | 17.2% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 74.9% | 40.0% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8) | Above avg | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 7.7% | 18.1% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 2.0% | 3.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 28.6% | 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
Rolling Hills Middle: reading the evidence
Rolling Hills posts 43.6% exceeding the standard — versus 17.2% statewide — with climate numbers better than most. That doesn't make it perfect. It makes it worth a visit to find what numbers can't measure.
Subject proficiency describes tested students, while graduation describes a graduating cohort. These figures are not successive stages followed by the same students.
Ask about what we don't score — class size, electives, the feel of a classroom — strong numbers everywhere on paper don't mean every classroom feels the same.
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.
Rolling Hills Middle is ranked #140 statewide · #2 of 7 in Buckeye Union Elementary.
01Score factorsWeighted composite · 2024–25
| Factor | School | State | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exceeded standard | 43.6% | 17.2% | 42% |
| Met or exceeded | 74.9% | 40.0% | 23% |
| Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8) | Above avg | average | 20% |
| Chronic absenteeism | 7.7% | 18.1% | 5% |
| Suspension rate | 2.0% | 3.6% | 5% |
| EL proficiency (ELPAC) | 28.6% | 18.0% | 5% |
- Exceeded standard
- ↑ vs CA 17.2% · index 80 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint
- Met or exceeded
- ↑ vs CA 40.0% · index 79 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint
- Growth (2023 G6 → 2025 G8)
- ↑ vs CA average · 70th pctile
- Chronic absenteeism
- ↑ vs CA 18.1% · index 65 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint · ▼ 1.6pp lower vs 2024
- Suspension rate
- ↑ vs CA 3.6% · index 57 · 50 = CA middle-school midpoint · ▼ 0.4pp lower vs 2024
- EL proficiency (ELPAC)
- ↑ vs CA 18.0% · index 60 · 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 | 233 | 44% | 35% | 15% | 6% | 79% | +33 |
| Grade 7 | 230 | 41% | 36% | 13% | 10% | 77% | +30 |
| Grade 8 | 280 | 36% | 42% | 15% | 7% | 78% | +32 |
| Math | Tested | EXC | MET | NEAR | NOT | MET+ | +/CA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 6 | 234 | 50% | 24% | 20% | 6% | 74% | +40 |
| Grade 7 | 231 | 45% | 26% | 18% | 11% | 71% | +37 |
| Grade 8 | 280 | 45% | 25% | 19% | 11% | 70% | +38 |
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 | 280 | 29% | 37% | 34% | 1% |
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 | 75 | 64.0% | +9 | +26 |
| White | 418 | 78.9% | +7 | +17 |
| Asian | 117 | 87.2% | −1 | +13 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Hills Middle ← | — | 69 | 43.6% | 74.9% | −2.7pp | +51 pts | 2.0% |
| Pleasant Grove Middle | 3.2 mi | 48 | 25.3% | 51.0% | +4.4pp | — | 6.4% |
| 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 | 73 | 94 | #119 | 42.1% | 75.9% | 4.6% | 2.0% | -3.5pp |
| 2022 | 72 | 95 | #113 | 39.0% | 72.4% | 17.3% | 1.3% | -1.3pp |
| 2023 | 70 | 93 | #140 | 37.4% | 70.4% | 9.8% | 2.4% | -7.0pp |
| 2024 | 62 | 90 | #225 | 37.5% | 71.5% | 9.3% | 2.4% | +0.7pp |
| 2025 | 69 | 94 | #140 | 43.6% | 74.9% | 7.7% | 2.0% | -2.7pp |
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 | 3.6% | 8.8% | +5.2pp |
| Male | 5.4% | 6.3% | +0.9pp |
| Asian | 3.2% | 1.7% | -1.5pp |
| Black/African American | 6.3% | — | — |
| Filipino | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.0pp |
| Hispanic/Latino | 5.3% | 10.9% | +5.6pp |
| Two or More Races | 4.1% | 15.4% | +11.3pp |
| White | 4.7% | 7.0% | +2.3pp |
| Students with Disabilities | 9.8% | 18.9% | +9.1pp |
| English Learners | 12.5% | 0.0% | -12.5pp |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | 13.0% | 22.1% | +9.1pp |
| All Students | 4.5% | 7.5% | +3.0pp |
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 | +8 | 712 | Accelerated | +18 | 713 | Accelerated |
| English Only | +8 | 617 | not categorised | +16 | 617 | not categorised |
| White | +5 | 400 | Accelerated | +15 | 401 | Accelerated |
| Asian | +8 | 113 | Accelerated | +30 | 114 | Exceptional |
| Hispanic or Latino | +7 | 112 | Accelerated | +9 | 111 | Accelerated |
| Students with Disabilities | +3 | 80 | Average | +13 | 82 | Accelerated |
| Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | +6 | 73 | Accelerated | +12 | 72 | Accelerated |
| Two or More Races | +16 | 61 | Accelerated | +22 | 61 | Exceptional |
| English Learner | +15 | 47 | Accelerated | +39 | 48 | Exceptional |
| Recently Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only | +13 | 41 | not categorised | +37 | 42 | not categorised |
| Filipino | +1 | 20 | Average | +25 | 20 | Exceptional |
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/rolling-hills-middle-2361"
width="100%" height="210" loading="lazy"
style="border:0;border-radius:12px"
title="Rolling Hills 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