san diego education research overview

EDUC

ATIO

NJANUARY 2012

SAN DIEGO EDUCATIONRESEARCH OVERVIEW

United Way of San Diego County

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

THE PIVOTAL YEARS 16 Key Facts 17 County Profile 19 Opportunities 25

THE STATE OF EARLY GRADE LITERACY 27 AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Key Facts 28 County Profile 29 National Comparisons 35

MIDDLE SCHOOL BENCHMARKS 36 Key Facts 37 County Profile 38 National Comparisons 45

SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF HIGH SCHOOL 46 Key Facts 47 County Profile 48

REGIONAL PROFILES 49

AcknowledgementsThis research overview was prepared by the University of San Diego’s Caster Family Center for Nonprofit and Philanthropic Research, under the direction of Dr. Laura Deitrick and in partnership with the United Way of San Diego County.

2012 UNITED WAY EDUCATION 1

INTRODUCTIONIn April of 2011, United Way Worldwide (UWW) released its

Education Research Overview. This comprehensive report summarizes

national research about UWW’s key education focus areas: school

readiness, fourth-grade reading proficiency, middle school success,

high school graduation, and college and work success. The report

specifically highlights relationships between school readiness,

reading proficiency, and student performance in English and math to

successful completion of high school. Based on the research findings,

the report also includes evidenced-based strategies for future action.

2 SAN DIEGO EDUCATION RESEARCH OVERVIEW

Graduating from high school is paramount

to a student’s ability to move on to

higher education or to successfully enter

the workforce. Unfortunately, by the time

many San Diego students enter high school

they are already on a path that could lead

to dropping out. In fact, in some parts of

San Diego County the cohort dropout rate

exceeds 20%. While there is some debate

about the accuracy of dropout data, which

is reported by the California Department

of Education, leading researchers have

documented an upward trend in the

dropout rate in California over the last

ten years.1 There are key educational

milestones, which if not successfully met

or addressed, will significantly decrease a

student’s probability of on-time high

school completion.2,3

While the national research released by

UWW has great utility, a closer examination

of regional data is warranted in order to

identify trends and issues that are unique

to San Diego County. Therefore, United

Way of San Diego County (UWSD) has

launched a comprehensive, community-

focused research initiative to explore

several of these key education focus areas

in greater depth, within a regional context.

This report provides key facts and findings

from the research completed thus far.


EXECUTIVESUMMARY


In April of 2011, United Way Worldwide (UWW) released its Education Research Overview. This comprehensive report sum-marizes national research about UWW’s key education focus areas: school readi-ness, fourth-grade reading proficiency, middle school success, high school gradu-ation, and college and work success. The report specifically highlights relationships between school readiness and reading proficiency and successful completion of high school. Based on the research find-ings, the report also includes evidence-based strategies for future action.

While this national report has great utility, a closer examination of regional data is warranted in order to identify trends and issues that are unique to San Diego County. Therefore, United Way of San Diego County (UWSD) has launched a comprehensive, community-focused research initiative to explore several of these key education focus areas in greater depth, within a regional context. This executive summary provides key facts and findings from the research completed thus far.

Graduating from high school is paramount to a student’s ability to move on to higher education or to successfully enter the workforce. Unfortunately, by the time many San Diego students enter high school they are already on a path that could lead to dropping out. In fact, in some parts of San Diego County, the cohort dropout rate exceeds 20%. While there is some debate about the accuracy of drop-out data, which is reported by the Califor-nia Department of Education, leading researchers have documented an upward trend in the dropout rate in California over the last ten years.1 Moreover, there are key educational milestones, which if not successfully met or addressed, will significantly decrease a student’s proba-bility of on-time high school completion.2,3

This executive summary provides findings from regional research of several such milestones, including early childhood development during the pivotal years of birth to five, early grade literacy, middle school performance, and successful completion of high school.

A LOCAL LOOK AT EDUCATION IMPERATIVES


Specific to San Diego County, the report:

Explores the concepts of quality child care and school readiness for children from birth to five

Documents the supply and demand for child care

Discusses the needs of parents and caregivers

Identifies and describes the types of students who are not reading proficiently by fourth grade

Identifies and describes the types of students who are not English Language Arts and/or math proficient by eighth grade

Identifies and describes the types of students who are more likely to take Algebra 1 in eighth grade

Presents regional trends that impact student achievement and completion of high school

Provides insight as to where intervention is most needed

KEY FINDINGSTHE PIVOTAL YEARS: BIRTH TO FIVEFrom economics to neuroscience, education to public policy, a vast body of research demonstrates that the early years of a child’s life matter tremendously. During this time children develop the linguistic, cognitive, social, and emotional building blocks for later development. Growth and learning opportunities in the early years mark the beginning of a path

that leads children through their school years to the completion of high school and to college graduation and into the workforce. A preponderance of research indicates that much of a child’s ability to stay successfully on this path is tied to his or her earliest learning experiences.4

Unfortunately, not all children have access to the types of care and educational experiences that adequately prepare them to enter school ready to learn. It is during these very early years of life that the playing field becomes uneven for some children. For example, children who live in poverty and children of color have been found to have fewer cognitive skills by the time they are four years old than other children.5

Key Findings Specific to San Diego County:

n Parental engagement in education is critical during the early years.

Parental engagement, such as readingand singing songs, help children develop linguistically. Increased parent engagement results in children who have larger vocabularies, who are better readers, and who perform better in school. Children who grow up in poverty often have less of these critical interactions.6

n Isolated populations are discon-nected from early-care services.

In San Diego, immigrant populations are often isolated by language. It has been suggested that the usual manner of communicating with families about available services is not effective for these populations.7

n The demand for child care in San Diego exceeds the supply.

Since many children spend a portion of their early years in some form of child care it is important to have an understanding about the accessibility and quality of child care available to working parents. In San Diego County there is a documented shortage of spaces available in licensed child care programs, especially for children in the zero through three age range and those requiring subsidized care. There are currently 5,171 children on the YMCA’s Centralized Eligibility List (CEL) for a subsidized slot.8 Additionally, there is a significant shortage of infant child care services across all income levels.9 Lack of child care services prevents parents from seeking employment.

n The cost of child care is prohibitive for low and middle-income families.

Licensed child care for preschool-aged children in San Diego ranges from $7,171- $11,242 a year, depending on the age of the child (e.g., infant or toddler) and type of care (e.g., center-based or family home care).10 For low-income households, child care costs can represent nearly one-third of their family income.

n Quality child care is uneven and needs to improve.

There is an urgent need for high-quality child care programs for all socioeconomic groups, particularly so for disadvantaged children.11 Local experts interviewed for this report stressed that quality in child care is uneven and must be addressed. Quality of care is directly linked to the level of competence of the staff or care-giver yet current educational standards for child care workers are minimal.12



n Transition to kindergarten is a key component for school readiness and overall school success.

It is imperative that children enter kindergarten ready to learn. Recent changes to California law mandate the creation of a transitional kinder-garten year at public schools. This should help to ensure that children entering kindergarten are in an age-appropriate setting and are better prepared to learn when entering kindergarten.

n Education in the early years is a smart social investment.

Preschool has a demonstrated economic impact. Every dollar spent on preschool generates more than a $7 savings by reducing the amount of government spending on welfare, criminal justice, and education.13

EARLY GRADE LITERACY AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

Up until the end of third grade most students are learning to read; beginning in fourth grade, they are reading to learn.14 Therefore, fourth-grade English Language Arts test scores are another important milestone on the path to high school graduation.

Every year, beginning in second grade, students in California take the California Standards Test (CST), which is one component of the overall state Standardized Testing and Reporting Program. Unless otherwise noted, the majority of student achievement data presented in this executive summary is derived from these CST test scores.

It is important to recognize that data used in this report were retrieved on or before 10/12/2011 and may not reflect later periodic adjustments made by the California Department of Education.


n San Diego’s fourth-grade students struggle with literacy.

On average, almost 30% of San Diego County fourth graders cannot read proficiently. 15 In some schools in the county , this number is as high as 72%.

n There are significant achievement gaps between ethnic groups.

Only 57% of all Hispanic and Latino and 58% of African American fourth- grade students in San Diego County are reading proficiently at the fourth-grade level compared to nearly 85% of White and Asian fourth graders. Figure 1 illustrates that the number of San Diego fourth-grade students reading proficiently has been increasing over the last five years, although this number has leveled off or decreased in some cases in 2011. Despite this trend over time toward improvement, 30% of all San Diego County students are still not reading proficiently in fourth grade.


Executive Summary Figure 1

CST English Language Arts by Ethnicity, Percent At or Above Proficiency for 2006-2011, Grade 4, San Diego County

Data Source: California Department of Education DataQuest


n San Diego’s schools include English Language Learners from many linguistic backgrounds.

Nearly one-quarter (23.8%) of all students in San Diego County are classified as an English Language Learner (ELL).16 Ninety-five percent of San Diego County ELL students who took the 2011 STAR exam have been enrolled in school in the U.S. 12 months or more.17 The majority of these students speak Spanish as their primary language. However, growing numbers of ELLs speak other languages, such as Vietnamese, Somali, Chal-dean, Arabic, Lao, Tagalog, Filipino, Japanese, and Korean.

For example, in eight of the elementary schools in the Cajon Valley School District, up to 9% of ELL students speak Chaldean as their native language.18 Of all students classified as English Language Learners, only 44% can read proficiently by fourth grade.19

n Students classified as English Language Learner (ELL) and economically disadvantaged score lower in English Language Arts than the total student population.

Furthermore, achievement gaps appear to widen for ELLs in the upper elementary grades so that by fifth grade ELLs are by far the most under-performing subgroup of students on the CST exam for English Language Arts.20

n Over half (53.6%) of the 36,504 fouth graders in San Diego County were considered economically disadvantaged in 2011.21

As Figure 2 illustrates, students who

are economically disadvantaged perform higher than ELLs on the CST English Language Arts exam. However, they are also under-performing when compared to the general fourth-grade population.


CST English Language Arts by Sub-Group, Percent At or Above Proficiency for 2006-2011, Grade 4, San Diego County


n English Language Arts proficiency is not evenly distributed throughout the county.

There are 19 different school districts that report at least one elementary school where over half the students do not read proficiently. Executive Summary Figure 3 highlights the school districts where the problem is especially concentrated which include the following: Oceanside, Vista, Escondido, Cajon Valley, San Diego, National City, and South Bay. In general, the schools with the lowest percentages of proficient readers are also the schools with the highest number of ELL students.



Percent of Students Proficient or Above on CST English Language Arts by Elementary School 2010-2011, San Diego County



MIDDLE SCHOOL BENCHMARKS

The middle school years are another critical juncture on the education continuum.22 Research about the importance of the middle school years demonstrates that for students in high-poverty environments, the middle grades are either a launching pad for high school success or the battleground where they are knocked off-track.23 Without inter-vention, it is unlikely that a sixth-grade student who is failing math or English will recover academically.24 For students who develop off-track indicators early in their academic career, the chances of an on-time high school graduation decrease.25 Therefore, middle school has been referred to as the “last, best chance” to identify and to intervene with students at risk of academic failure.26 Yet, many San Diego middle school students face barriers to learning, with nearly 30 percent classified as an ELL and half considered economically disadvantaged.27


n There is very little change in student achievement trends from elementary to middle school.

In 2011, 36% of San Diego County eighth-grade students were not proficient in English Language Arts. Similar to San Diego County fourth graders, CST test score data demonstrate achievement gaps in terms of ethnicity, socio-economics, and ELL status for San Diego County eighth graders. For example, half of San Diego County’s Hispanic and African-American eighth-grade students are proficient in English Language Arts, compared to White and Asian students who are demonstrating around 80% proficiency.28

n Algebra is increasingly seen as an important ingredient to high school success yet students are not equally prepared to take algebra in middle school.

Additionally, research suggests that failing Algebra 1 severely impacts a student’s ability to graduate from high school on time.29 For most students, eighth grade presents the first opportunity to take Algebra 1. In 2011, 61% of San Diego County eighth-grade students took the CST Algebra 1 exam while 30% took the general math CST exam. Students who took the Alge-bra 1 CST exam were more likely to be proficient in the subject matter (52%) than those who took the general math CST exam (32%).

n Enrollment in Algebra 1 in eighth grade is more likely for certain sub-populations.

Although Algebra is often cited as the gateway course for students who will go on to college, certain populations of students are more likely to be on that path than others. Executive Summary Table 1 shows that eighth-grade stu-dents classified as ELL are much less likely to be enrolled in Algebra 1. Yet, students who are not economically disadvantaged or who have college educated parents are far more likely to take Algebra 1 in eighth grade.

Executive Summary Table 1

8th Grade Students Enrolled in Algebra 1 Based on 2011 CST Exam Scores, San Diego County


Student Sub Group Percent Taking CST Math Exam

Percent Taking CST Algebra 1 Exam

Economically Disadvantaged 39% 61%

NOT Economically Disadvantaged 26% 74%

English Language Learner 61% 39%

Parent Did Not Complete High School 44% 56%

Parent Graduated High School 39% 61%

Parent Graduated College 24% 76%

The ultimate goal for every student is an on-time graduation from high school. However, more and more San Diego Coun-ty students are not realizing that goal. Dropping out of school is not a sudden decision. Rather, it is a long-term process of disengagement. This disengagement begins in elementary grades and continues until dropping out occurs, usually in the later years of high school.30 When students

do not successfully complete high school there are both social and economic impacts on the student, communities, and society at large. The California Drop-out Research Project reports that students who fail to finish high school will earn less, have poorer health outcomes, and rely more on government assistance than students who complete high school.31

SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF HIGH SCHOOL



n San Diego County has an overall cohort drop out rate of 15.9%.

While there is some debate about the accuracy of dropout data, which is reported by the California Department of Education, leading researchers have documented an upward trend in number of dropouts in California over the last ten years.32

n Dropout rates are not evenly distributed throughout the county.

As Figure 4 depicts, schools with dropout rates above 10% tend to be concentrated in the Central, East Suburban, and North County East regions of the county.

n Students who are classified as English Learners 33 are more likely to drop out of high school.

The cohort dropout rate in San Diego County is 27% for English learners as compared with 19.7% for economically disadvantaged students.

n Males are more likely to drop out than females.

The cohort dropout rate in San Diego County is 17.8% for males and 13.9% for females.


San Diego Region High School Dropout Rates by School



CONCLUSIONOne of the strongest roles United Way plays in making real community change is that of a mobilizing force, recruiting people with passion, expertise and resources to make a difference. In the area of Education, United Way of San Diego County is beginning to shape the commu-nity conversation, convene stakeholders to examine issues, develop strategies and execute action plans on issues that matter most.

After reviewing the local research on this topic several key facts stand out:

n Parental engagement is critical to help ensure students’ academic success.

Increased parental engagement results in children with larger vocabularies, who are better readers, and who perform better in school.


Every dollar spent on preschool generates more than a $7 savings by reducing the amount of government spending on welfare, criminal justice and education.

n There is a significant achievement gap between ethnic groups.

Only 57% of all Hispanic and Latino, and 58% of African American fourth- grade students in San Diego County are reading proficiently at the fourth-grade level compared to nearly 85% of White and Asian fourth graders.


n Students classified as English Language Learners (ELL), and economically disadvantaged, score lower in English Language Arts than the total student population.

Achievement gaps appear to widen for ELLs in the upper elementary grades so that by fifth grade, ELLS are by far the most under-performing subgroup of students on the California Standards Test exam for English Language Arts.

n There is little change in student achievement trends from elementary to middle school.

36% of San Diego County eighth-grade students were not proficient in English Language Arts.

n Students who are classified as English Learners are more likely to drop out of high school.

The cohort dropout rate in San Diego County is 27% for these students as compared with 15.9% for the entire student population. Looking at the big picture – from cradle to career – the data suggest that there are four key strategies that must be in place to ensure that all children are afforded the educational opportunities they deserve.

1. Engage students in learning while in school.

Experts say that engaging our children – meeting them where they are, having high expectations and challenging them – is critical.

2. Support families to improve academic achievement.

Research shows that when families are actively involved in their child’s learning, it improves that child’s attendance, social skills, grades, and chances of staying in school. This is true for younger children as well as for middle and high school students.

3. Connect students with the resources they need outside of school.

Only 20% of a student’s waking hours are spent in school, so out-of-school-time learning is a key part of the suc-cess equation. Children learn in every aspect of their life – from the minute they are born – so a community web of social, cultural, educational, and economic resources should be in place (and sustained) to encourage learning.

4. Build stronger systems to support children and youth.

Fragmented community systems – such as schools, health care, human service, and juvenile justice systems – deal with children and families from one particular perspective. Too often, those efforts are not connected. Research shows that when leaders of schools, health care, family support, youth development, child welfare, justice, and other systems find ways to work together to support student success, children and youth benefit from higher quality, more coordinated services.

These strategies are supported by the local research outlined in this report, input from our donors, and the community feedback highlighted in our recently published report, Voices for the Common Good: San Diego Speaks Out On Education. The action strategies presented go beyond what United Way of San Diego County might do. This is by design. We want to lay out the bigger picture of what needs to be done in conjunction with the broader community.

Which strategies United Way of San Diego County should hone in on – and how, with whom – depends on our community’s vision, its current challenges, and its resources, both human and financial. The identification and implementation of the specific United Way strategies will become the work of the Education Vision Council.


THE PIVOTAL YEARS


Growth and learning opportunities in the early years mark the beginning of a path that leads children through their school years to high school and college graduation and into the workforce. A preponderance of research indicates that much of a child’s ability to stay successfully on this path is tied to his or her earliest learning experiences.

This section of the report presents information about childhood development from birth to age five and provides a detailed description about the challenges and potential opportunities facing San Diego County in this area.

More specifically, this section does the following:

n Explores the concept of quality care in the early years

n Identifies major areas for quality improvement

n Documents the supply and demand for child care

n Discusses the needs of parents (e.g., finding resources, assessing quality care, accessing and affording this care)

n Discusses the needs of caregivers (e.g., resources, professional development opportunities)

n Analyzes gaps in care and barriers to service for different populations

Readers of this report should note that there is no single comprehensive data source that documents the activities and development of children before they enter kindergarten in San Diego County. Some data exist about children who are enrolled in licensed daycare and preschool settings; however, less than half of San Diego County children are enrolled in such programs. There are over 231,143 children under the

age of five in San Diego County.34 At the end of 2009, there were 83,254 licensed child care slots in the county for children under the age of five.35 Assuming that all these slots are filled means that (at the very least) the majority of San Diego’s children age five and below are being cared for by parents, family members, or in unlicensed settings.

KEY FACTSn There is overwhelming evidence

about the benefits of quality child care in the early years. From economics to neuroscience, education to public policy, a vast body of research demonstrates that the early years of a child’s life matter tremendously.36

n In early childhood, children develop the linguistic, cognitive, social, and emo-tional building blocks for later develop-ment. And, as early childhood provides a window of opportunity to dramatically shape a child’s brain while it is rapidly developing, the role of parents and caregivers is critical. Not all children have access to the types of care and educational experiences that adequately prepare them to enter school ready to learn. Thus, it is during these very early years of life that the playing field becomes uneven for some children. For example, by the time they are four years old, children who live in poverty cannot keep pace with the cognitive skills of their peers who have the benefit of resources such as quality preschool.37

n In California, children with fewer resources are entering kindergarten with cognitive scores averaging 60% below the scores of children whose families have greater resources and are in higher income brackets.38

1. THE PIVOTAL YEARS: BIRTH TO FIVE


n Although evidence abounds to suggest that high-quality preschool experiences level the playing field for those from low-income families, such children are less likely to attend a preschool program.39

In 2009, only 21% of all children in San Diego County under the age of six attended preschool, nursery school, or Head Start for at least 10 hours per week.40

A recent national study released by United Way Worldwide documented several key challenges across the nation that prevent children in the early years from being adequately and equally prepared to succeed in school.

These include the following:

n Socioeconomic disparities

n Lack of access to affordable, stimulating early-learning opportunities

n Ability to reach families who are disconnected from traditional supports and services

n Lack of available data about children’s strengths and vulnerabilities before and at kindergarten entrance

n Not enough awareness about the impor-tance of investments in the early years 41

Documented Lifetime Benefits of Early Educationn Better prepared to transition to kindergarten

n Better reading and math skills

n Richer vocabularies

n Higher levels of educational achievement

n Higher levels of employment

n Higher levels of income

n Positive health habits and better overall health

n Better relationships with parents


PROFILE OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY

Parental engagement in education is critical during the early years.

Parental engagement, such as reading and singing songs, helps children develop linguistically. Increased parental engagement results in children with larger vocabularies, who are better readers and who are more academically successful in school. Nationwide, children who grow up in poverty often have less of these critical interactions.42 Additionally, research studies have resulted in a greater under-standing of the importance of parents being engaged in their child’s earliest school experiences. Promoting parental engagement in early-education settings such as preschool is one way to improve the likelihood of continued engagement in elementary school and beyond.

Isolated populations are disconnected from early-care services.

In California and San Diego County, there are communities that are isolated geographically and linguistically. These populations may be ethnic minorities, or they may not have access to mainstream media sources such as the Internet. In 2009, First 5 California conducted research to learn more about hard-to-reach com-munities in California. They found that less than half of California households speak only English at home. Thirty-two percent of California households with children speak Spanish or Spanish Creole. The next most prominent languages state-wide include Chinese (1.9%), Vietnamese (1.2%), Tagalog (1.0%), and Korean (0.8%). Language and other cultural barriers prevent these populations from receiving information about important child care resources. It has been suggested that the usual manner of communicating with families about available services is not effective for these populations.43


The landscape of stakeholders in the early years is extremely complex.

There is a complex network of agencies and individuals involved in funding, regulating, caretaking, and delivering service-related to children in the early years of life. Federal, state, and local governmental agencies are involved because all three are funders and providers of services to children from birth to five. State agencies are responsible for licensing and accountability of child care programs. Parents who stay home to care for their children may be thought of techni-cally as providing a service, while at the same time, parents who enroll their children in child care or preschool may be considered consumers or recipients of services.

Further complicating the issue is the wide range of child care service providers in the early years. For example, child care provid-ers may be center-based or home-based; they may be nonprofit or for-profit; they may be religious or secular. Some public school systems offer programming such as a preschool or transitional kindergarten. (Appendix A of this report provides a list of the many organizations that are involved in different aspects of early childhood devel-opment.) Whatever the situation, the sheer multitude of stakeholders and their myriad roles make it difficult to neatly assess the landscape of the early years and further complicates potential intervention strate-gies. This is unlike children in the K-12 years, where the point of access is usually through a single public school system and the major-ity of children may be evaluated collectively using standardized tests.

The demand for child care in San Diego exceeds the supply.

Since many children spend a portion of their early years in some form of child care it is important to have an understanding about the accessibility and quality of child care available to working parents. In San Diego County there is a documented short-

age of spaces available in licensed child care programs, especially for children in the zero- to-three age range and for those requiring subsidized care. In San Diego County, the YMCA’s Child Care Resource and Referral program is responsible for managing the screening and referral of low-income children into child care programs that are subsidized by government funding. There are currently 5,171 children on the YMCA’s Centralized Eligibility List (CEL) for a subsi-dized slot.44 These are non-welfare, low-income families waiting for subsidized child care. Interviews done for this report found that for-profit private providers and state-op-erated programs are also reporting a waiting list for preschool services.

In its 2010 Child Care Needs Assessment, the San Diego County Office of Education provided detailed projections about demand for licensed child care services across the county. The research found that demand for child care is distributed fairly evenly across the county, and overall demand is projected to increase as the number of working par-ents is projected to grow by 4.6% over the next 10 years.

The study documents the insufficient supply for child care services in the infant years across all regions of the county and estimated a shortfall of services for 14,788 infants. Alternatively, the study estimates a small surplus of spaces for preschool-aged children ages three to five in all regions of the county except for East County, where they estimate a shortage.45

There are several possible reasons why San Diego is experiencing a shortage of services for infants. For example, licensing regula-tions require increased staffing for infant care, and work with infants is generally more intense than with toddlers. These two condi-tions make infant care less cost effective for child care providers and, as a result, child care providers often elect to serve toddlers over infants. Also, there are only two funding sources for subsidized infant care.46


The cost of child care is prohibitive for low- and middle-income families.

Licensed child care for preschool-aged children in San Diego County ranges from $7,171–$11,242 a year. The actual cost varies for each family and depends on several factors, including the age of the child (e.g., infant or toddler) and type of care (e.g., center-based or family home care).47 For low-income households, child care costs can represent nearly one-third of their family income. Single parents or families that only have one working parent are even more affected.

Often, the cost of child care outweighs the financial benefits of working, so parents are unable to seek work or children are

left in the care of friends or relatives or in unlicensed facilities. Additionally, there is a gap in services for families that do not qualify for subsidized child care (income more than $3,768/month)48 but do not make enough to be able to pay the full cost of child care.

One way to understand the impact of child care costs is to compare them to a family’s overall monthly budget. Figure 1 illustrates this relationship through two common scenarios that use family budget numbers generated through California’s 2011 Self-Sufficiency Standard which is produced by the Insight Center for Community Economic Development. (The monthly costs presented in the Self Sufficiency Standard are derived

Data Source: Insight Center for Community Economic Development. See: http://www.insightcced.org

* Total taxes reflect a $50 child care tax credit and an $83 child tax credit

Common Scenarios: Figure 1-A


using credible data sources and regional differences are taken into account. See: http://www.insightcced.org.) In Scenario A, the family will need $50,864 to cover its monthly costs and in Scenario B the family will need to earn $76,317 to cover its monthly costs.

These scenarios demonstrate why child care for low-income families is not possible without government assistance. The scenarios further demonstrate that a lack of affordable child care has a direct impact on family income levels and the San Diego County workforce. Parents who

want to work may elect not to if it does not make financial sense. Others may be forced to leave their children in child care settings (e.g., with friends or relatives) or unlicensed facilities where quality is not necessarily assured. Additionally, in San Diego, 44% of the families living in poverty are single-parent households.49 Without another parent to stay home and care for children, these families are virtually guaranteed to remain in poverty without some sort of government assistance with child care.

Common Scenarios: Figure 1-B

Data Source: Insight Center for Community Economic Development. See: http://www.insightcced.org

* Total taxes reflect a $100 child care tax credit and a $167 child tax credit


Quality in child care is uneven and needs to improve.

A growing body of child-development research, neuroscience, and program evaluation demonstrates that high- quality early-childhood care and education programs improve school readiness and later outcomes for young children.50 This is especially true for children in low-income families.51

The federal government provides block grants to states for child care; in California these are administered through the state’s Child Care and Development Fund. It is mandated that at least 4% of these funds be expended on improving quality. Iden-tified target areas for improvement are presented in the sidebar on Page 21 of this report and provide a comprehensive framework for thinking about potential areas of intervention related to quality.52

Future Quality Improvement Activities for California Child Care Target the Following:

n Health and safety of children in child care

n Establishing early learning guidelines

n Development of preschool learning foundations, curriculum

frameworks, & supporting materials

n Creating pathways to excellence for child care programs

n Quality assurance and monitoring

n Outreach and consumer education

n Resource and referral programs

n Professional development systems and workforce initiatives

n Child care workforce retention

n Compensation, benefits, and workforce conditions

n Evaluation of quality improvement activities

Source: California Department of Education: Summary of the Child Care and Development Fund State Plan for the Period

of 10/1/11 through 9/30/13 for California


As these target areas demonstrate, there are multiple dimensions related to quality in early-childhood development programs. Local experts interviewed for this report stressed the importance of the environment as it relates to quality. First, they discussed the importance of the physical environment from a health and safety perspective, and they stressed the need for the physical environment to be age appropriate. One expert commented that creating a devel-opmentally appropriate environment is a function of the staff’s ability to adapt the environment at hand to be age appropri-ate. In other words, it does not necessar-ily require deep financial resources, but rather, a trained and creative staff to cre-ate a productive learning environment.

A second and equally important aspect of the environment is the interaction between caregiver and child. Here, local experts stressed the importance of a dynamic environment where the needs of the children are constantly assessed. Again, quality interaction depends in large part on the training and capacity of the individual caregiver.

The Role of Teacher/Provider

Research shows that qualified and well-compensated care providers and teachers are the cornerstone of high-quality early-childhood programs. However, studies have found that the majority of profes-sionals who make up the current early-childhood workforce are not adequately trained. Hiring and retaining experienced

early-childhood professionals continues to be challenging across all types of early-childhood care and education programs.53

Professional development for providers is the most often cited pathway to improving the quality of child care. However, current regulations regarding staff training have been designed using the philosophy of “one size fits all,” and as a result are con-sidered to be minimal, focusing primarily on “bricks and mortar” (e.g., buildings and grounds). In terms of formal educa-tion, positions of significant responsibility in child care settings only require 12 units of child development coursework. On an average, the annual salary for child care workers in San Diego is $21,000.54

High staff turnover in the field disincentiv-izes the investment in staff development. However, because there is an overwhelm-ing body of research that connects staff training to quality outcomes, some entities are providing funding to incentivize providers to seek additional professional development. For example, in San Diego County, there were 11 identified programs offering free professional child care training (Appendix B.) These free trainings include assistance with establishing a new child care business as well as supporting and maintaining existing services. There are federal and state funds available to offset the cost of these programs for qualified participants; however, the current state budget crisis is a threat to these programs.


Measuring Quality

In San Diego County, there are 5,359 licensed child care facilities.55 Licensing is considered to be the lowest baseline measure of quality. (Appendix C provides greater details about California licensing requirements.) Yet, most state licensing standards “do not come close to meeting expert recommendations for safe care.”56 Indeed, experts interviewed for this report shared the opinion that basic licensing alone was not sufficient to demonstrate quality and noted that a lack of state funds is hampering licensing and monitoring.

Some providers seek additional accredi-tation for their programs as a further measure of quality, and accreditation standards are generally considered to be higher than basic licensing standards. However, according to the YMCA of San Diego County, only 1% of licensed child care providers (59 child care centers and 15 family child care homes) are accredited at this time. (Appendix D of this report provides a list of accredited organizations.)

The fees related to accreditation can range from several hundred dollars to several thousands of dollars with additional annual fees. Fees vary based on the accrediting agency and the number of children served in the child care program. The accreditation process can take any-where from several months to over a year to complete. Fees and the time require-ments associated with accreditation may prohibit providers from seeking to engage in the process.

OPPORTUNITIES

Transition to kindergarten is a key component to school readiness and overall school success.

The transition to kindergarten is a critical time for schools, families, and children. Research conducted by The Harvard Family Research Project found that successful transition reduces financial costs to schools, and it levels the academic and social/emotional playing field for children from low-income families. Furthermore, properly managing this process can bring families closer to the educational experience of their children.57

The State of California has established a transitional kindergarten program to address issues of school readiness. Nearly a quarter of the kindergartners who entered school in 2010 in California were only four years old. In 2010, SB 1381 was approved, changing the eligibility age for kindergarten to five years old. The change will be gradual. Starting in Sep-tember 2011, the entry age increases by one month each year until 2013 when all children entering kindergarten will need to be five years old by September 1st. It is estimated that changing the kindergarten entry date in California will generate a cost savings that will be used to provide these four-year-olds an additional year of preparation before kindergarten.


Transitional kindergarten programs will offer children developmentally appropri-ate curriculum that is aligned with kin-dergarten standards. Classes would be taught by teachers from the K-12 system. Research shows that moving the kinder-garten entry date up increases test scores by as much as 27%.58 It is also expected that transitional kindergarten will help students who are classified as English Language Learners (ELLs) because they will have more time for language develop-ment before entering kindergarten. The program will be fully implemented statewide by 2015.59

Additional resources for parents may assist development in the early years.

Personal preferences and/or a lack of disposable income preclude some parents from sending their children to preschool. In the same way that child care providers benefit from professional development, parents or other relatives who care for children in the early years need to receive information about the positive ways in which they can influence the development of their pre-school-aged children. Additionally, these populations need additional outreach and assistance to ensure that they are engaged in the education of their children.

Education in the early years is a smart social investment.

Nationally, United Way Worldwide reports that there is a positive return on investment (ROI) in educating children in the early years, especially at-risk children. This ROI includes higher graduation rates, better job skills, increased home-ownership, and less chance of criminal activities.60

Specifically in California, the RAND Corporation found that a $4,300-per-child cost beyond current public preschool spending could generate $11,400 in benefits per child for California for a net benefit of over $7,000 per child or $2.62 for every dollar expended, under the baseline assumptions of the research.61

There is also a regional economic impact related to child care on the provider side. As previously noted, there are over 5,300 child care providers in the county. Over 70% of these establishments are home-based small businesses that contribute to the local economy as employers and as a supporting resource to the workforce. Additionally, direct and indirect federal and state child care subsidies are estimated to bring an additional $300 million dollars to San Diego annually.62

THE STATE OF EARLY-GRADE LITERACY AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT



2. THE STATE OF EARLY-GRADE LITERACY Early-grade literacy is vital to long-term academic success. Research has shown that high school graduation can be predicted with reasonable accuracy by a student’s reading level at the end of third grade.63 Up to the end of third grade most students are learning to read; beginning in fourth grade, they are reading to learn.64 Thus, if students do not have adequate language arts skills by fourth grade, their capacity to learn in later grades is impeded.

This section of the report provides information about literacy trends in grades two through five and provides a detailed description about the challenges facing San Diego County in this area.

More specifically, this section does the following:

n Provides key facts describing student achievement in the United States

n Presents data about regional trends that impact reading proficiency

n Identifies and describes the types of students who are not reading proficiently in San Diego County

KEY FACTSn Across the nation fourth graders

performing at the proficient level on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading test “should be able to demonstrate an overall under-standing of the text, providing inferen-tial as well as literal information. When reading text appropriate to fourth grade, they should be able to extend the ideas in the text by making inferences, drawing conclusions, and making connections to their own experiences.”65

n Of all U.S. fourth graders who took the NAEP reading test in 2009, 83% of the students from low-income families failed to reach the “proficient” level compared with 67% of all students.66

n Research indicates that up to half of the printed fourth-grade curriculum is incomprehensible to students who read below that grade level.67

n Nationally, disparities in reading achievement exist among racial and ethnic groups. The percentage of low-income African American, Hispanic/ Latino, and Native American students who score below proficient on the NAEP reading test is extremely high (89%, 87%, and 85% respectively) and much higher than the percentage of low-income White and Asian/Pacific Islander students (76% and 70%).68


There are over 400 elementary schools in San Diego County, serving nearly a quarter of a million students. Every year, beginning in second grade, students in California take the California Standards Test (CST), one component of the overall state Standardized Testing and Reporting Program (STAR).

Table 1 presents data on overall English Language Arts CST test scores for county students in grades two through five. This test is often used as an approximation for the reading proficiency of elementary school students. In general, the percent of all San Diego County elementary school students who score proficiently in English Language Arts ranges from 51% (in third grade) to 70% (in fourth grade).69

Table 1:

San Diego County 2011 STAR Test Results, English Language Arts, All Students, Grades 2 – 5


Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5

Students Tested 36,152 34,300 33,660 34,054

% Advanced 32% 21% 43% 37%

% Proficient 29% 30% 27% 30%

% Basic 21% 27% 20% 21%

% Below Basic 11% 14% 8% 8%

% Far Below Basic 8% 7% 3% 4%

% At or Above Proficiency 61% 51% 70% 67%

PROFILE OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY


Similar to the UWW report, this research study looked closely at the reading pro-ficiency of fourth-grade students. Figure 2 demonstrates that the number of San Diego fourth-grade students who read proficiently has been improving over the last five years, although the number has leveled off or decreased in some cases in 2011. And, despite this trend over time toward improvement, 30% of all

San Diego County students are still not reading proficiently in fourth grade. The figure also illustrates an obvious achieve-ment gap between sub-populations of students. Only 57% of all Hispanic/Latino and 58% of African American fourth-grade students in San Diego County are reading proficiently, compared to nearly 85% of White and Asian fourth graders.

Figure 2:




As Figure 3 shows, CST data for particular sub-populations reveal another achieve-ment gap between the overall student population and students who are classi-fied as either economically disadvantaged or as English Language Learners (ELLs). Although there is a trend toward improve-ment for all groups, in 2011 only 44% of

San Diego County students who are clas-sified as ELLs were reading proficiently in fourth grade. Economically disadvantaged students also lag behind the general population, although to a lesser degree than ELL students.

Figure 3:




Figure 4 provides additional information about how this achievement gap is distributed across grade levels. Interest-ingly, at the fifth-grade level, ELLs are further behind all other student sub-groups than they are in the earlier grades.

The research findings about San Diego County students suggest that, similar to

the national findings presented by UWW, certain populations of students require additional assistance learning to read. In San Diego County, this is most noticeably students who are classified as ELLs and/or economically disadvantaged, as well as students who are identified as African American and Hispanic/Latino.

Figure 4:

CST English Language Arts, by Sub-Group, Percent At or Above Proficiency for 2011, by Grade Level, San Diego County



Figure 5:

Percent of Students Reading Proficiently by Elementary School, San Diego County


As the data show, there are large achieve-ment gaps in reading proficiency between different sub-groups of students across San Diego County. To further examine the issue on a regional level, test score data were gathered for 394 individual public elementary schools in the county.

The findings are mapped in Figure 5 and show that student reading proficiency is not evenly distributed and spans from a high of 97% proficient at Torrey Pines Elementary School in San Diego to a low of 19.5% proficient at Beyer Elementary in San Ysidro.70

READING PROFICIENCY ACROSS THE COUNTY


There are 19 different school districts in San Diego County, with at least one elementary school where more than half the students do not read proficiently. School districts where the problem is especially concentrated include Oceanside, Vista, Escondido, Cajon Valley, San Diego, National City, and South Bay.

In general, the schools with the lowest percentages of proficient readers are also the schools with the highest number of ELL students. ELL students in San Diego County are most likely to speak Spanish as their primary language. However, as a result of the growth of immigrant populations from places other than Mexico, in some San Diego elementary schools more than five percent of ELLs speak languages such as Vietnamese, Somali, Chaldean, Arabic, Lao, Tagalog, Filipino, Japanese, and Korean.

For example, in eight of the elementary schools in the Cajon Valley School District, between five and nine percent of the ELL students speak Chaldean as their native language. Nearly 10% of the ELL students at Marshall Elementary and 14% at Carver Elementary in San Diego Unified speak Somali as their primary language, and in National City, as many as 17% of the ELL students speak Filipino.71

This report includes an analysis of languages spoken by more than 5% of the population of ELLs (Appendix E). Both the school data and interviews with community experts revealed that there are many more languages spoken by smaller percentages of students. One person interviewed for this report pointed out that the growing proportion of languages other than Spanish spoken by San Diego students is adding additional complexity to literacy instruction because different needs exist within the different immigrant populations.


Since the UWW reports are rich with national data about student performance, it is interesting to consider how San Diego County students compare to other U.S. students. Unfortunately, NAEP—the only national standardized achievement test—generally provides data on a statewide basis. Furthermore, because the two are very separate and distinct assessments, there is no way to compare NAEP data to STAR test data.72 However, NAEP doesprovide some data about large urban school districts, and San Diego Unified

(SDUSD) is included in this group. There-fore, to make a national comparison, at least to some degree, NAEP data for SDUSD is presented in Figure 6. In general, fewer fourth-grade students in the SDUSD are reading proficiently compared to the nation as a whole. However, in all but one sub-category presented, SDUSD stu-dents score higher than the state average. As Figure 6 illustrates, more ELLs in SDUSD are reading proficiently than their peers at the state or national level.

Figure 6:

NAEP Achievement Levels for 2009 in Reading, Grade 4

Data Source: National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

NATIONAL COMPARISONS


MIDDLE SCHOOLBENCHMARKS


The middle school years are another criti-cal juncture on the education continuum.73 Research about the importance of the middle school years demonstrates that for students living in high-poverty envi-ronments, the middle grades are either a launching pad for high school success or the battlegrounds where they are knocked off-track. Moreover, a lack of proficiency in both reading and mathematics by eighth grade has significant ramifications. Research conducted by United Way of Greater Los Angeles reports that middle school students’ academic achievement is a strong predictor of high school com-pletion and college enrollment.74 Addition-ally, UWW has published research demon-strating that students’ college and career readiness is bolstered when focusing on middle school; high school interventions alone may be too little, too late.75

Without intervention, it is unlikely that a sixth-grade student who is failing math or English will recover academically. And, for students who develop off-track indications early in their academic career, the chances of an on-time high school graduation decrease.76 Therefore, middle school has been referred to as the “last, best chance” to identify and intervene with students at risk of academic failure.77 Here in San Diego, middle school students face these very real impediments to learning with nearly one-third classified as ELL and nearly half considered to be economically disadvan-taged.78 More specifically, this section of the report does the following:

n Provides key facts describing student achievement in the United States

n Identifies and describes the types of students who are not English Language Arts and/or math proficient by eighth grade

n Identifies and describes the types of students who are more likely to take Algebra 1 in eighth grade

KEY FACTS

Grade Level Proficiency

n Across the United States only 30% of all eighth-grade students are scoring at or above proficient in English Language Arts. That percentage is lower for economically disadvantaged (16%) and English Language Learners (3%).79

n Research suggests that it is possible to predict up to 60% of high school dropouts long before high school. Key indicators in sixth grade include poor attendance, citizenship/behavior, and/or academic performance. Failing either English or math is also a red flag.80

n For students who develop these warning signs early in their academic career, the chances of graduation decrease.81

n Children who form bonds with teachers in their elementary school years are more likely to achieve positive student outcomes by the time they reach eighth grade. It follows that highly mobile students, such as homeless students, children of migrant farm workers, and children in military families may not have the same opportunities to form these beneficial bonds with teachers. This is an important consideration in San Diego County because close proximity to an international border and a large military presence increases the likelihood of a more mobile student population.

3. MIDDLE SCHOOL BENCHMARKS


In San Diego County there were 111,148 students enrolled in grades six through eight during the 2010-2011 academic year.83 This section of the report presents data about English Language Arts and math proficiency of eighth-grade students in San Diego County and shows differences between specific sub-populations.84

As Table 2 indicates, middle school stu-dents in San Diego experience significant barriers to success. Approximately one-third (32%) are considered Limited English Proficient (LEP), which is comparable to the California state average. One-half (50.3%) are considered to be socio-economically disadvantaged, which is slightly lower than the state average.

Table 2:

Enrollment by Program, Grades 6-8, San Diego County and California 2010-2011


Number of Middle School Students

Percent of Total Enrollment: SD County

Percent of Total Enrollment: State of CA

Limited English Proficiency 35,225 31.7% 31.1%

Socio-Economically Disadvantaged 55,892 50.3% 55.6%

COUNTY PROFILE


Like students in elementary school, middle school students85 in California also take the annual California Standards Test (CST). Table 3 presents data about overall English Language Arts proficiency for San Diego County middle school students, grades six through eight. Notably, the student achievement trends previously presented for elementary school do not

change much in middle school. The percentage of middle school students testing at or above proficiency in English Language Arts is 62% in sixth grade, 65% in seventh grade, and 64% in eighth grade. Approximately one-quarter of the students in all three grades tests at the basic level with the remainder testing below basic or far below basic.

Table 3:

San Diego County 2011 STAR Test Results, English Language Arts, All Students, Grades 6-8


Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

Students Tested 33,896 34,300 33,707

% Advanced 33% 29% 36%

% Proficient 29% 36% 28%

% Basic 26% 22% 23%

% Below Basic 8% 9% 8%

% Far Below Basic 3% 4% 5%

% At or Above Proficiency 62% 65% 64%


As indicated in Figure 7, the overall num-ber of eighth-grade students in San Diego County who read proficiently increased between 2006 and 2011. However, the figure also illustrates a clear disparity in academic achievement between White and Asian students and their Hispanic/Latino

and African American peers. Only half of Hispanic/Latino (50%) and African American (51%) students in San Diego County are reading at or above proficiency by grade eight.

Figure 7:





Figure 8 illustrates that students who are economically disadvantaged or ELLs also experience achievement gaps when compared to the total student population. Despite an upward trend across all groups, only 13% of San Diego County eighth-grade

students classified as ELLs were proficient in English Language Arts compared to 49% of economically disadvantaged students.(See Appendix F for a breakdown of middle school data by individual school.)

Figure 8:



An achievement gap is also evident in CST scores for mathematics. Figure 9 below displays the percent of eighth-grade stu-dents who scored at or above proficiency in general mathematics from 2006 through 2011. The figure reveals an obvious peak in the number of students scoring at or above proficiency in the 2007-2008 school year across all ethnicities. Once again there is a noticeable achievement gap between the White and Asian student populations

and those included in the Hispanic/Latino and African American student populations. For instance, approximately 27% or less of both Hispanic/Latino and African American eighth-grade students in San Diego County tested at or above proficiency in general mathematics in 2011 compared to about 43% of both Asian and White students.

Figure 9:

CST General Mathematics by Ethnicity, Percent At or Above Proficiency for 2006-2011, Grade 8, San Diego County


Math


In Figure 10 San Diego eighth-grade students are broken down by sub-group in order to examine any disparities between these sub-groups. Again, there is a peak in the percentage of students scoring at or above proficiency in the 2007-2008 school year and improvement over 2010 for each group presented. Across all years the percentage of ELLs attaining the proficient or advanced level in general mathemat-ics is far below the general eighth-grade

population. With only 15% of ELLs achiev-ing scores of proficient and above in 2011, this group also falls behind those who are economically disadvantaged (24% in 2011). Overall, the percentage of eighth-grade students scoring proficient and above in general mathematics is low and has not surpassed 36% in the last five years.

Figure 10:

CST General Mathematics by Sub-Group, Percent At or Above Proficiency for 2006-2011, Grade 8, San Diego County



Algebra is increasingly seen as an impor-tant ingredient for high school success.86 For most students, eighth grade presents the first opportunity to take Algebra 1, yet not all students are equally prepared to take algebra in middle school. In 2011, 61% of San Diego County eighth-grade students took the CST Algebra 1 exam while 30% took the general math CST exam. Eighth-grade students who took the Algebra 1 CST exam were more likely to be proficient in the subject matter (52%) than those who took the general math CST exam (32%).

Despite the higher levels of achievement for Algebra 1 students, achievement gaps exist among ethnic sub-groups.

Fifty percent of Hispanic/Latino and 37% of African American eighth-grade students scored proficient or above on the Algebra 1 CST exam, compared to 61% of White and 73% of Asian students.

Although Algebra is often cited as the gate-way course for students who will go on to college, certain populations of San Diego students are more likely to be on that path than others. Table 4 shows that San Diego County eighth-grade students classified as ELL are much less likely to be enrolled in Algebra 1. Yet, students who are not economically disadvantaged or who have college-educated parents are far more likely to take Algebra 1 in eighth grade.

Table 4:

8th Grade Students Enrolled in Algebra 1 Based on 2011 CST Exam Scores, San Diego County


Student Sub-Group Percent Taking CST Math Exam

Percent Taking CST Algebra 1 Exam

Economically Disadvantaged 39% 61%

NOT Economically Disadvantaged 26% 74%

English Language Learner 61% 39%

Parent Did Not Complete High School 44% 56%

Parent Graduated High School 39% 61%

Parent Graduated College 24% 76%

Algebra


As in the previous section, NAEP data were analyzed at the national and state level as well as for SDUSD. As explained earlier in this report, NAEP provides data at the national and state level and pro-vides limited data on select metropolitan school districts, including SDUSD. No data is provided at the county level. Fur-thermore, because the testing tools differ significantly, there is no way to compare NAEP data to STAR test data.87 This limits the option for county-level comparisons.

Figure 11 illustrates that, overall, SDUSD students read at or above proficiency at lower rates than their peers at the national level (22% for SDUSD as compared to 30% nationwide). However, more SDUSD English Language Learners and economically disadvantaged students test at or above proficiency than their national or statewide counterparts.

Figure 11:

NAEP Achievement Levels for 2009 in Reading, Grade 8

Data Source: National Association Education Progress (NAEP)

NATIONAL COMPARISONS


COMPLETING HIGH SCHOOL


3. COMPLETING HIGH SCHOOL The ultimate goal for every student is an on-time graduation from high school. However, more and more San Diego County students are not realizing that goal. Dropping out of school is not a sudden decision. Rather, it is a long-term process of disengagement. This disengagement begins in elementary grades and continues until dropping out occurs, usually in the later years of high school.88 When students do not successfully complete high school there are both social and economic impacts on the student, communities, and society at large. The California Drop-out Research Project reports that students who fail to finish high school will earn less, have poorer health outcomes, and rely more on government assistance than students who complete high school.89

This section of the report does the following:

n Identifies and describes the types of students who are less likely to graduate high school in San Diego County

KEY FACTSn Communities pay a high cost for

high school dropouts. In California it is estimated that the annual economic loss from juvenile crime associated with high school dropouts is $1.1 billion dollars.90

n Research firmly establishes the relationship between early literacy and high school dropout rates; students who are not proficient readers are at a much higher risk of dropping out of high school.91

Student Demographics

n Males are more likely to drop out than females. The 2009-2010 cohort drop-out rate in San Diego County is 13.9% for females and 17.8% for males.

n Dropout rates also vary by ethnicity. In San Diego County, students identified as African American, Hispanic/Latino, Native American, and Pacific Islander are more likely to drop out of high school.

Student Sub-Groups

n Students who are classified as English Learners 92 are more likely to drop out of high school. In San Diego County the cohort dropout rate for these students is 27%, which is 4.1% below the state rate.

n The dropout rate for San Diego County’s economically disadvantaged students is disturbing, but more promising com-pared to California’s statewide numbers. In San Diego, 19.7% of economically disadvantaged students drop out, compared to 21.8% statewide.93


While there is some debate about the ac-curacy of dropout data, which is calculated by the California Department of Education, leading researchers have documented a general upward trend in the number of drop-outs in California over the last ten years.94

In California the cohort dropout rate for 2009-2010 was 18.2 percent.95 In San Diego County the countywide rate was re-ported to be 15.9 percent.96 Figure 12 pres-ents the geographic distribution of cohort dropout rates for particular high schools across San Diego County (Appendix G).

As Figure 12 denotes, schools with higher cohort dropout rates are clustered in parts of Central and South Suburban San Diego County, as well as in some parts of North County East. It is important to note that school bussing and school choice pro-grams—especially in SDUSD—make it difficult to draw direct associations between particular high schools and the middle and elementary schools that may feed students to those high schools.

Figure 12:

San Diego Region High School Dropout Rates

Data Source: San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)

COUNTY PROFILE


REGIONAL COMPARISONSAs the data have shown, reading and math proficiency and issues related to dropouts are not evenly distributed throughout the county; thus, a deeper understanding about specific communities is required to inform decision-making. To analyze and present this information, school data— including elementary school English Language Arts proficiency scores and other

demographic data— were aggregated by Major Statistical Area (MSA) and are pre-sented as regional profiles in this section of the report. To provide additional context, demographic projection data is provided to reflect how these regions are expected to change by 2020.97 (Figure 13 depicts the seven MSAs in the San Diego region.)

Data Source: San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)

Figure 13:

San Diego Major Statistical Areas


NORTH COUNTY WEST REGION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY

The total population of the North County West region of San Diego County is 424,311; in 2020, this figure is projected to increase by 11%. Also by 2020, the school-age population (for ages five to fourteen) is projected to grow by 11%. The residents in this region are predominantly White, representing 63% of the total population, followed by Hispanic (24%), Asian (5%), and then Black at 4% of the population.98 The major languages spoken in this region are English and Spanish, with 75% of residents speaking only English and 17% speaking Spanish and English.99

The North County West region comprises six school districts (Cardiff, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Oceanside, Rancho Santa Fe, and San Dieguito). In the North County West region the percent of elementary school students scoring proficient and above on the 2011 CST English Language Arts exam ranges from a low of 33% at one school to a high of 93% at another. Furthermore, the one elementary school in the Rancho Santa Fe district, as well as all but one school in Cardiff, and all but three schools in both the Encinitas and Carlsbad districts met their Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) toward English Lan-guage Arts proficiency, based on guide-lines from the California Department of Education and the STAR California Standards Test (CST).100 In the Oceanside school district, however, 80% of elementary schools failed to meet AYP toward English Language Arts proficiency last year.

KEY FACTS NORTH COUNTY WEST REGION


Figure 14:

San Diego County Elementary Schools Percent of Students Proficient and Above 2011 CST English- Language Arts Exam

Additionally, Oceanside district elemen-tary schools have a high number of eco-nomically disadvantaged students as well as a high percentage of English Language Learner students compared to other districts in the region. Spanish is the pri-mary language for the majority of English Language Learner students in the entire North County West region, with no other languages more than 5% reported.101

In terms of the educational attainment of the population, 18% of the residents have graduated high school; 26% of residents have attended some college but have no degree; and 23% have obtained a bachelor’s degree.102

Household income in this region is widely varied, with 9% of the population living below poverty level.103


NORTH COUNTY EAST REGION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY

The total population of the North County East region of San Diego County is 428,471; in 2020, this figure is projected to increase by 10%. Also by 2020, the school-age population (for ages five to fourteen) is projected to grow by 16%. The residents in this region are predominantly White, representing half of the total popu-lation, followed by Hispanic (40%), Asian (4%), and then Black at 2% of the popula-tion.104 The major languages spoken in this region are English and Spanish, with 66% of residents speaking only English and 28% speaking Spanish and English.105

The North County East region comprises eight school districts (Bonsall, Escondido, Fallbrook, San Marcos, San Pasqual, Vallecitos, Valley Center, and Vista). In the North County East region the percent of elementary school students scoring pro-ficient and above on the 2011 CST English Language Arts exam ranges from a low of 31% at one school to a high of 89% at another. Furthermore, in all elementary schools in the region, all but one school in both the Valley Center-Pauma and Bonsall districts met their Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) toward English Language Arts proficiency, based on guidelines from the California Department of Education and the STAR California Standards Test (CST).106 In the rest of the region, however, both the lone schools in San Pasqual and Vallecitos failed to meet AYP toward English Language Arts proficiency while 90% of elementary schools in the Escondido district, 70% of schools in San Marcos, 60% of schools in the Fallbrook district, and 60% of schools in the Vista district also failed to do so.

KEY FACTS NORTH COUNTY EAST REGION


Figure 15:

San Diego County Elementary Schools Percent of Students Proficient and Above 2011 CST English Language Arts Exam

Additionally, Escondido, San Marcos, and Vista district schools have a high number of economically disadvantaged students and English Language Learner students. Spanish is the primary language for the majority of English Language Learner students in all the North County East region schools, with no other languages more than 5% reported.107

In terms of the educational attainment of the population, 21% of the residents have graduated high school, 26% of the residents have attended some college but have no degree, and 15% have obtained a bachelor’s degree.108



NORTH CITY REGION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY

The total population of the North City region of San Diego County is 754,447; in 2020, this figure is projected to increase by 14%. Also by 2020, the school-age population (for ages five to fourteen) is projected to grow by 10%. The residents in this region are predominantly White, representing 63% of the total population, followed by Asian (18%), Hispanic (12%), and then Black at 3% of the population.110 The major languages spoken in this re-gion are English and Spanish, with 74% of the residents speaking only English and 8% speaking Spanish and English. Eleven percent of the residents speak an Asian/Pacific Island language and English.111

The North City region comprises four school districts (Del Mar, Poway, San Di-ego, and Solana Beach). In the North City region the percent of elementary school students scoring proficient and above on the 2011 CST English Language Arts exam ranges from a low of 38% at one school to a high of 97% at another. Furthermore, in the four elementary school districts, all Del Mar district schools, all Solana Beach district schools, and all but four Poway district schools met their Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) toward English Language Arts proficiency, based on guidelines from the California Department of Educa-tion and the STAR California Standards Test (CST).112 In the San Diego district, however, 40% of elementary schools district-wide failed to meet AYP toward English Language Arts proficiency. It is also important to note that the San Diego district spans two county regions (Central and North City). In the North City region, the San Diego district fares better in AYP achievement than in the Central region (40% not meeting AYP versus 70% not meeting AYP, respectively, with total num-ber of schools fairly similar).

KEY FACTS NORTH CITY REGION


Figure 16:


Additionally, the San Diego district has the highest number of English Language Learner students and economically dis-advantaged students of all four districts. Spanish is the first language for the ma-jority of English Language Learner stu-dents in all the North City region schools, with other languages (more than 5% of speakers) including Korean (Del Mar dis-trict), Filipino (Poway district), Vietnamese, Filipino, Japanese, and Korean (SDUSD).113




CENTRAL REGION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY

The total population of the Central region of San Diego County is 638,951; in 2020, this figure is projected to increase by 14%. Also by 2020, the school-age population (for ages five to fourteen) is projected to grow by 19%. The residents in this region are predominantly Hispanic, representing 40% of the total population, followed by White (32%), Asian (12%), and then Black at 11% of the population.116 The major languages spoken in this region are English and Spanish, with 55% of residents speaking only English and 31% speaking Spanish and English. Eleven percent of residents speak an Asian/ Pacific Island language and English.117

The Central region comprises three school districts (Coronado, National City, and San Diego). In the Central region the per-cent of elementary school students scor-ing proficient and above on the 2011 CST English Language Arts exam ranges from a low of 28% at one school to a high of 87% at another. Furthermore, in the three districts, both Coronado schools met their Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) toward English Language Arts proficiency, based on guidelines from the California Depart-ment of Education and the STAR California Standards Test (CST).118 In the National City district, however, all of the elementary schools district-wide failed to meet AYP toward English Language Arts proficiency while 70% failed to do so in the San Diego district. It is also important to note that the San Diego district spans two county regions (Central and North City).

KEY FACTS CENTRAL REGION


Figure 17:

San Diego County Elementary Schools Percent of Students Proficient and Above 2011 CST English Language Arts Exam

Additionally, all the National City schools have nearly 100% economically disad-vantaged students and a high number of English Language Learner students. In the San Diego district, as well, the majority of schools also have high numbers of economically disadvantaged and English Language Learner students. Spanish is the first language for the majority of English Language Learner students in all the Central region schools, and other languages (more than 5% of the speakers) include Filipino (National City district) and

Filipino, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Lao and Somali (San Diego district).119

In terms of the educational attainment of the population, 20% of the residents have graduated high school. 24% of the residents have attended some college but have no degree, and 15% have obtained a bachelor’s degree.120



EAST COUNTY REGION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY

The total population of the East County region of San Diego County is 23,080; in 2020, this figure is projected to increase by 13%. Also by 2020, the school-age population (for ages five to fourteen) is projected to grow by 10%. The primary jurisdiction in this region is largely an unincorporated area. The residents in this region are predominantly White, representing 53% of the total population, followed by Hispanic (34%), Black (5%), and then American Indian at 4% of the population.122 The major languages spoken in this region are English and Spanish, with 82% of the residents speaking only English and 15% speaking Spanish and English.123

The East County region comprises five school districts (Borrego Springs, Julian, Mountain Empire, Spencer Valley, and Warner). In the East County region the percent of elementary school students scoring proficient and above on the 2011 CST English Language Arts exam ranges from a low of 28% at one school to a high of 75% at another. Furthermore, in the five elementary school districts, the lone Borrego Springs district school, the lone Spencer Valley school, and all but one Mountain Empire district school met their Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) toward English Language Arts proficiency, based on guidelines from the California Depart-ment of Education and the STAR California Standards Test (CST).124 The Julian and Warner districts, each comprising one school, both failed to meet their AYP toward English Language Arts proficiency.

KEY FACTS EAST COUNTY REGION


Figure 18:


Additionally, several Mountain Empire district schools (as well as the Warner and Borrego Springs district schools) have a high number of economically disadvan-taged students. Spanish is the primary language for the majority of English Language Learner students in all the East County region schools, with no other languages more than 5% reported.125




EAST SUBURBAN REGION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY

The total population of the East Suburban region of San Diego County is 487,856; in 2020, this figure is projected to increase by 9%. Also by 2020, the school-age population (for ages five to fourteen) is projected to grow by 7%. The residents in this region are predominantly White, representing 65% of the total popula-tion, followed by Hispanic (21%), Black (5%), Asian (3%), and American Indian at 1% of the population.128 The major lan-guages spoken in this region are English and Spanish, with 81% of the residents speaking only English and 12% speaking Spanish and English.129

The East Suburban region comprises nine school districts (Alpine, Cajon Valley, Dehesa, Jamul-Dulzura, Lakeside, La Mesa-Spring Valley, Lemon Grove, Ramona, and Santee). In East Suburban region elementary schools the percent of elementary school students scoring proficient and above on the 2011 CST English Language Arts exam ranges from a low of 27% at one school to a high of 81% at another. Furthermore, in the nine elementary school districts, both of the lone schools in the Dehesa and Jamul Dulzura districts, and all but one school in the Alpine school district, met their Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) toward English Language Arts proficiency, based on guidelines from the California Depart-ment of Education and the STAR California Standards Test (CST).130 Of the six remain-ing districts, 90% of elementary schools in the Cajon Valley district failed to meet AYP toward English Language Arts profi-ciency, while this number reached 70% in Santee, 60% in La Mesa-Spring Valley, 50% in Lakeside, 50% in Lemon Grove and 40% in Ramona.

KEY FACTS EAST SUBURBAN REGION


Figure 19:


Spanish is the primary language for the majority English Language Learner students in all the East Suburban region schools, and other languages (more than 5% of speakers) include Arabic, Chaldean (Cajon Valley district) and Somali (Lemon Grove district).131

In terms of the educational attainment of the population, 26% of the residents have graduated high school; 31% of the residents have attended some college but have no degree, and 13% have obtained a bachelor’s degree.132

Household income in this region varies widely; 10% of the population lives below poverty level.133


SOUTH SUBURBAN REGION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY

The total population of the South Sub-urban region of San Diego County is 374,436; in 2020, this figure is projected to increase by 20%. Also by 2020, the school-age population (for ages five to fourteen) is projected to grow by 29%. The residents in this region are predomi-nantly Hispanic, representing 55% of the total population, followed by White (24%), Asian (13%), and then Black (4%).134 The major languages spoken in this region are English and Spanish, with 44% of the residents speaking only English and 46% speaking Spanish and English. Eight per-cent of the residents also speak an Asian/Pacific Island language and English.135

The South Suburban region comprises three school districts (Chula Vista, San Ysidro, and South Bay). In South Sub-urban region the percent of elementary school students scoring proficient and above on the 2011 CST English Language Arts exam ranges from a low of 20% at one school to a high of 80% at another. Furthermore, in the three elementary school districts, all but three schools in the San Ysidro district met their Adequate Year-ly Progress (AYP) toward English Language Arts proficiency, based on guidelines from the California Department of Education and the STAR California Standards Test (CST).136 In the South Bay school district, however, all schools failed to meet AYP toward English Language Arts proficiency while in Chula Vista, the largest district of the three, 50% of the schools district-wide also failed to do so.

KEY FACTS SOUTH SUBURBAN REGION


Additionally, the San Ysidro elementary district schools have the highest percent-age of English Language Learner students and economically disadvantaged students in the region. Spanish is the primary language for the majority of English Lan-guage Learner students in all the South Suburban region schools, with no other language more than 5% reported.137



Figure 20:



The following is a synopsis of some key findings along a cross-comparison of the regions presented in the next section of

this report. Data presented here were gathered from the San Diego Association of Governments 2050 Regional Forecast.

Table 5

MSA Key Cities Notable Regional Findings

North County West

OceansideCarlsbadEncinitas

2nd highest current median household income

North County East

VistaSan MarcosEscondido

Largest Pacific Islander increase by 2020 (24%)

North City

Solana BeachDel MarPowaySan Diego

Highest current population (overall and school-age)

2nd largest population increase by 2020 (14%)

Largest Hispanic increase by 2020 (62%)

Highest current median household income

CentralCoronadoNational City

2nd highest current population (overall and school-age)

Will overtake North City region in school-age population by 2020


2nd largest school-age population increase by 2020 (19%)

2nd largest Hispanic increase by 2020 (18%)

Lowest current median household income

East County

SanteeLa Mesa El CajonLemon Grove

Lowest current population (overall and school-age)

East Suburban

Unincorporated Area

2nd largest Black increase by 2020 (30%)

2nd largest Asian increase by 2020 (31%)

South Suburban

Chula VistaImperial Beach

Largest population increase by 2020 (20%)

Largest school-age population increase by 2020 (29%)

Largest Black increase by 2020 (31%)


GLOSSARY OF TERMS The information and definitions are from the websites of the following sources: California Department of Education (CDE), Education Data Partnership, National Center for Education Statistics, and San Diego Association of Governments.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) The AYP is a statewide accountability system, mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which requires each state to ensure that all schools and districts make Adequate Yearly Progress. School districts as well as schools must make AYP in several areas, based primarily on student performance and participation:

n Performance: Each year the percent of students in each sub-group scoring “proficient” or above in English Lan-guage Arts and mathematics on stan-dardized tests must meet or exceed target percentages known as “annual measurable objectives” (AMOs) that increased substantially for 2009.

n Participation: The percent of students in each sub-group taking the tests must meet or exceed 95%.

n Additional indicators for AYP include scoring at certain levels on the Academic Performance Index (API) and, for districts with high schools, improving their graduation rates.

California Standards Test (CST) The CSTs for English Language Arts, mathematics, science, and history-social science are administered only to students in California public schools. Except for a writing component that is administered as part of the grade seven English Language Arts tests, all questions are multiple-choice. These tests were developed specifically to assess students’ knowledge of the California content standards.

The State Board of Education adopted these standards, which specify what all children in California are expected to know and be able to do in each grade or course. The CST scores are used for calculating each school’s Academic Performance Index (API) and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

CST Proficiency ScoresThe CST Proficiency Scores, as defined and reported by the state, are presented below:

Percent (of Students Who Scored at Each) Performance LevelCalifornia uses five performance levels to report student achievement on the CSTs:

n Advanced: This category represents a superior performance. Students dem-onstrate a comprehensive and complex understanding of the knowledge and skills measured by this assessment, at this grade, in this content area.

n Proficient: This category represents a solid performance. Students demon-strate a competent and adequate under-standing of the knowledge and skills measured by this assessment, at this grade, in this content area.

n Basic: This category represents a limited performance. Students demon-strate a partial and rudimentary under-standing of the knowledge and skills measured by this assessment, at this grade, in this content area.

n Far Below / Below Basic: This category represents a serious lack of performance. Students demonstrate little or a flawed understanding of the knowledge and skills measured by this assessment, at this grade, in this content area.

MSA Key Cities Notable Regional Findings

North County West

OceansideCarlsbadEncinitas

2nd highest current median household income

North County East

VistaSan MarcosEscondido

Largest Pacific Islander increase by 2020 (24%)

North City

Solana BeachDel MarPowaySan Diego

Highest current population (overall and school-age)


Largest Hispanic increase by 2020 (62%)

Highest current median household income

CentralCoronadoNational City

2nd highest current population (overall and school-age)

Will overtake North City region in school-age population by 2020


2nd largest school-age population increase by 2020 (19%)

2nd largest Hispanic increase by 2020 (18%)

Lowest current median household income

East County

SanteeLa Mesa El CajonLemon Grove

Lowest current population (overall and school-age)

East Suburban

Unincorporated Area

2nd largest Black increase by 2020 (30%)

2nd largest Asian increase by 2020 (31%)

South Suburban

Chula VistaImperial Beach

Largest population increase by 2020 (20%)

Largest school-age population increase by 2020 (29%)

Largest Black increase by 2020 (31%)


Centralized Eligibility List (CEL) is maintained by the San Diego YMCA. It is a waiting list for qualified children in need of child care in San Diego County.

Child Care Center/Day Care Center is a child care facility other than a family daycare of any capacity providing services less than 24 hours per day of non-medical care and must be licensed.

Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) is an observation instrument developed to assess classroom quality in preschool through third-grade classrooms. The CLASS consists of three domains (emotional support, classroom organization, and instructional support) that incorporate 10 dimensions of teacher-student interactions.

Cohort Dropout Rate, as used in this report, is the 4-year adjusted cohort dropout rate calculated by the California Department of Education. The cohort is defined as the group of students that could potentially graduate during a 4-year time frame. The 4-year adjusted cohort includes all students who enter ninth grade for the first time in the initial year of the 4-year time frame used to define the cohort. This cohort is then adjusted by adding students who later transfer into the cohort and subtracting students who transfer out, emigrate to another country, or die during the 4-year time frame. The 4-year adjusted cohort dropout rate is then defined as the rate of students that leave the grade 9-12 instructional system without receiving a high school diploma, GED, or special education certificate of completion and do not remain enrolled after the end of the 4-year time frame.

Note that the 4-year time frame used to define the cohort in this report began in the 2006-2007 school year and ended with the 2009-2010 school year. Thus, only one year of cohort dropout data is

available at this time. For a more detailed definition of the cohort dropout rate see: http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr11/yr-11rel54.asp

Early Educator is a term used for center-based staff and licensed family child care providers serving children birth to age five. Early educators perform multiple roles, serving as teachers, caregivers, and partners with families.

Economically Disadvantaged students are enrolled in the program for free or reduced price meals. County social service offices for the whole attendance area report the number of students. This figure is often used as a measure for socioeconomic status for students.

English Language Learner (ELL) is a student who is not yet proficient in English. In previous years these students were referred to as Limited English Proficient (LEP). Students are identified as English learners until they achieve district-specified scores on state achievement tests and meet other academic criteria.

Environment Rating Scales (ERS) are observational assessment tools used to evaluate the quality of early learning and care programs. Examples of these scales include the Infant Toddler Environment Rating Scale – Revised (ITERSR), the Early Childhood Rating Scale Revised (ECERS – R), and the Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale (FCCERSR). Each ERS is divid-ed into criteria that assess the program’s physical environment, health and safety procedures, materials, interpersonal rela-tionships, and opportunities for learning and development.

Family Day Care/Family Child Care is regularly provided care, protection, and supervision of children in the caregivers own home for a period of less than 24 hours.


Financial Incentives are associated with quality rating systems and are typically designed to motivate providers to partici-pate in the system, encourage staff to ob-tain additional relevant training, and pro-vide resources for quality improvements. Generally, programs with higher ratings receive greater financial assistance than do programs with lower ratings. Examples of financial incentives include tiered pro-vider reimbursement, program develop-ment grants, and tax credits.

Infant is a child from birth to 24 months and overlaps with the toddler age range.

Large Family Child Care Home is a home providing family care for up to 12 children and must be licensed.

License Exempt Care Providers are individ-uals who are not required by law to have a license to operate and are not required to follow the licensing requirements of DSS. These providers may care for children from only one other family in addition to their own children and relatives. License exempt care providers are often friends, neigh-bors, or family members.

Licensed Care Providers have applied for and received a license from the Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing.

Major Statistical Area (MSA) is a group of census tracts that divide San Diego County into seven sub-areas, numbered zero through six.

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is the largest nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas. Assessments are conducted periodically in mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics, economics, geography, and U.S. history. Since NAEP assessments are administered uniformly using the same sets of test

booklets across the nation, NAEP results serve as a common metric for all states and selected urban districts. The assess-ment stays essentially the same from year to year, with only carefully documented changes. This permits NAEP to provide a clear picture of student academic progress over time.

Preschool serves “preschool age children,” meaning children who are not enrolled in either an infant care center or a school-age child daycare center.

Preschooler is a child 36 to 48 months of age.

Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) is a system that not only assesses and rates early learning and care programs, but also provides technical assistance and support services to help programs improve.

Small Family Child Care Home is a home that provides family home care for up to six children and must be licensed.

Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) is a program that includes four components: California Standards Tests, California Modified Assessment, California Alternate Performance Assessment, and Standards-based Tests in Spanish.

The PITC Program Assessment Rating Scale (PITC PARS) is an assessment tool designed by WestEd to evaluate programs that serve children birth to age three. The PARS measures primary care, small groups, continuity of care, individualized care, inclu-sive care, and culturally responsive care.

Tiered Reimbursement Systems are finance mechanisms that offer higher subsidy payments to child care programs that meet higher standards of care.

Toddler is a child aged 18 to 36 months, overlapping with the infant age range.


APPENDIX A: Organizations Working to Support Child Development in the Early YearsCalifornia Resources General Child Care and Development are state and federally funded programs that use centers and family child care home networks operated or administered by either public or private agencies and local educa-tional agencies. These agencies provide child development services for children from birth through 12 years of age and older children with exceptional needs. These programs provide an educational component that is developmentally, culturally, and linguistically appropriate for the children served. The programs also provide meals and snacks to children, parent education, referrals to health and social services for families, and staff development opportunities to employees.

Migrant Child Care and Development programs serve the children of agricultural workers while their parents are at work. The centers are open for varying lengths of time during the year, depending largely on the harvest activities in the area. In addition to these center-based programs, the budget for fiscal year 2009-10 continues to provide for the Migrant Alternative Payment Network Program that allows eligibility and funding for services that follow migrant families as they move from place to place to find work in the Central Valley.

California State Preschool Program Chapter 308, Statutes of 2008 Assembly Bill 2759, created the Califor-nia State Preschool program. This program consolidated the funding for State Preschool, Pre-kindergarten and Family Literacy, and General Child Care center-based programs serving eligible three- and four-year-old children to create the California State Preschool Program, the largest state-funded preschool program in the nation. The program provides both part-day and full-day services that provide a core class curriculum that is developmentally, culturally, and linguistically appropriate for the children served. The program also provides meals and snacks to children, parent education, referrals to health and social services for families, and staff development opportunities to employees. The program is administered through local educational agencies, colleges, community-action agencies, and private nonprofit agencies.

California Child Care Resource and Referral Network (CCCR&RN) is a nonprofit membership organization that holds several contracts from the California Department of Education to provide services to parents seeking child care and child care providers seeking training and other services. Local child care resource and referral programs may elect to join the CCCR&RN.

California Child Care Resource and Referral Programs are mandated by the California Education Code and funded by the California Department of Education in every county to do the following: maintain up-to-date databases with information about licensed child care centers and family child care homes; help parents understand their child care options, including providing them with information about the TrustLine Registry for license-exempt providers; increase the supply and quality of child care; and educate the community and local policy makers about child care issues and concerns.

California Early Learning Quality Improvement System (CAEL QIS) is the term used in Senate Bill (SB) 1629 (Steinberg, Chapter 3078, Statutes of 2008) for a system to improve outcomes for children and promote school readiness by improving the quality of early learning and care programs for children from birth to age five.

California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) is a longitudinal data system used to maintain student level data, such as demographics, courses, discipline records, assessments, staff assignments, and other information for state and federal reporting.

California School Age Families Education (CalSAFE) is designated to increase the availability of support services necessary for enrolled expectant and parenting students to improve their academic achieve-ment and parenting skills and provide a quality early learning and care program for children. This program replaces the Pregnant Minors Program, the School Age Parenting and Infant Development Program, and the Pregnant and Lactating Students Program.

California State Advisory Council on Early Childhood Education and Care (Early Learning Advisory Council, or ELAC) is the name used in Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Executive Order (S2309) to establish a state advisory council that meets the federal requirements to qualify for funds available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to support improvements in early learning and care. ELAC will make recommendations to improve the state’s policies and practices, including the implementation of the CAEL QIS, in ways that will lead to better child outcomes.


Child Protective Services, a component of the California Department of Social Services, is the major state system for intervening in cases of reported or suspected child abuse, neglect, and exploitation. When a referral is received, the staff is obligated to investigate the claim by obtaining facts from the person making the referral.

First 5 California, also known as the California Children and Families Commission, is dedicated to improv-ing the lives of California’s young children and their families through a comprehensive system of education, health services, child care, and other crucial programs. First 5 California distributes funds to local communities through the state’s 58 counties, all of which have created their own local commissions.

Head Start is a federally funded and administered preschool program that provides comprehensives services to both low income children and their families. To be eligible, a child must generally be at least three years old by the date used to determine eligibility for public schools in the community. At least 90% of the children enrolled in Head Start must be from low-income families.

Early Head Start promotes healthy prenatal outcomes, healthy families, and the optimal development of infants and toddlers beginning as young as newborn infants.

Migrant and Seasonal Head Start is designed to provide comprehensive Head Start services, including child development and social services, to low-income families working in agriculture or families who migrate while working in agriculture.

Tribal Head Start primarily serves Native Americans living on reservations or colonies throughout Northern California.

License Exempt Early Learning and Care Programs are early childhood education programs that are administered by an agency with operational oversight and responsibility for the following:

• Meeting Title 22 program licensing standards

• Providing liability coverage

• Providing financial and legal recourse for families

These programs include Tribal programs; CalSAFE programs; parent cooperatives operated by agencies, such as local educational agencies; and parks and recreation programs.

Local Child Care Planning Councils, mandated by the California Education Code, are found in every Califor-nia County. Funded by the California Department of Education, each council is responsible for planning and coordinating early learning and care services in its county. Councils also typically advocate for high quality, accessible and affordable child care services.

The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) is a nonprofit association focusing on professional development to improve the quality of educational and developmental services for children from birth through age eight. NAEYC administers a national, voluntary accreditation system of professional standards for early childhood education programs, which helps families identify high quality programs for their children.

The National Child Care Information and Technical Assistance Center is a national clearinghouse and techni-cal assistance center that provides comprehensive early learning and care information resources and techni-cal assistance to state Child Care and Development Fund administrators and other key stakeholders.

The Program for Infant/Toddler Care (PITC) is designed by WestEd to help infant and toddler teachers assist young children’s cognitive and social and emotional development. The PITC’s guides, manuals, and onsite trainings help child care managers and infant/toddler care teachers become sensitive to infants’ cues, connect with their family and culture, and develop responsive, relationship-based care.


Title 5 General Child Care and Development is a state-contracted full-day program serving children ages birth to three and kindergarten age-eligible children up to including children 13 years old. Eligible children include those under Child Protective Services supervision or those who meet income eligibility requirements or other criteria. This program is required to meet the same Title 5 standards as the State Preschool Program.

Title 5 State Preschool programs are designed to prepare three- and four-year-old children from low-income families for kindergarten. Priority is given to children who are Child Protective Services recipients, children who are identified by Child Protective Services as being at risk for neglect or abuse, and four-year-old children who are income eligible. Programs must meet Title 22 requirements and additional requirements that include stricter child to adult ratios and increased teacher and staff qualifications.

Title 22 licensed programs meet Title 22 licensing requirements set by the DSS. These requirements include staff-child ratios, teacher and staff qualifications, criminal background checks, screening and clearance for tuberculosis, and licensing inspections for compliance with basic health and safety requirements.

TrustLine is California’s registry of in-home child care providers, tutors, and in-home counselors who have passed a background screening. All caregivers listed with TrustLine have been cleared through a fingerprint check of records at the California Department of Justice, which means they have no disqualifying criminal convictions or substantiated child abuse reports in California. TrustLine is administered by the DSS and the Child Care Resource and Referral Network.

San Diego Resources

County Office of Education: A demonstration project of an effective universal preschool system is currently underway in San Diego County; it is called the San Diego County Preschool for All (SDCPFA) Demonstration Project. Preschool for All is a term used in California to describe an “effective preschool” delivery system. This refers to the idea that all preschool-age children should have free, voluntary access to quality preschool regardless of family income, starting with the children that need it most. Children must be four years old by December 2 of the current program year, except for those children living in the National region which encompasses National City and parts of San Ysidro. Children living in the National region must be at least three years old by December 2 of the current program year.

The project is being developed under the leadership of the San Diego County Office of Education with funding provided by First 5 San Diego who allocated $30 million dollars for its implementation. The project will last five years, with work ending in 2011. Key features of the project include the following:

• Quality preschool experiences

• A variety of preschool settings that families can choose from

• Socially, culturally, and linguistically appropriate early childhood education

• Professional growth of teachers

• Inclusive of children with special needs

Early Start is an in-home based program promoting healthy prenatal outcomes, healthy families, and the optimal development of infants and toddlers beginning as young as newborn infants. Services are provided by a collaboration of San Diego and Imperial Counties Regional Center, Exceptional Families Resource Center, and the County of San Diego Department of Education.

Exceptional Family Resource Center provides support, information, and education for families of children with disabilities and the professionals who assist these families. By offering emotional support and factual information, the Center enables families to help their children reach their fullest potential.


First 5 San Diego provides funding services and activities to achieve desired results for children of San Diego under the age of six years old. They fund the County Department of Education Preschool For All program. They advocate for policy change at local and state levels and build community and organizational capacity to sup-port families.

Head Start is a federally funded child development program designed to help break the cycle of poverty by providing preschool children of low-income families with a comprehensive program to meet their emotional, social, health, nutritional, and psychological needs. The approach is that the parent is the child’s primary educator and that the entire family, as well as the community, must be involved.

School Districts provide state funded preschool for children ages two through four years old. Some school districts are participating in the Preschool For All program and others have Head Start programs on their campuses.

San Diego Child Care Planning and Development Planning Council is appointed by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors and the County Superintendent of Schools for the purposes of assessing San Diego child care needs and coordinating plans to address those needs.

The Council is charged to do the following:

• Review current service availability and assess the need for additional child care services.

• Coordinate planning for the development of additional programs and advocate for necessary funding for child care for all children.

• Establish priorities, based on the Council’s Child Care Needs Assessment and community input on the equitable use of incoming funding to meet the needs of San Diego’s children and families.

• Conduct a needs assessment of child care throughout the county at least once every five years.

• Serve as a forum to address the child care needs of all families in the county and in all child care programs.

• Serve as an advisory body to the San Diego County Board of Supervisors and County Superintendent of Schools on child care issues.

The purpose of the council is to coordinate with the San Diego community to establish priorities for the distribution of federal, state, and local child-development funds and to advocate funding for child care services and programs. It works with community agencies, businesses, consumers, providers, and organizations to support and to enhance community child care resources and services. It promotes and enhances the quality of child care and development services through public education, provider education, and provision of support services.

San Diego Regional Center (SDRC) serves as a focal point in the community through which a person with a developmental disability and his or her family can obtain services and be linked to other community re-sources within San Diego and Imperial counties.

YMCA – Resource and Referral Network operates several preschools throughout the county, serving children two and a half through five years of age. These programs are licensed by the State of California and Com-munity Care Licensing and comply with the requirements of the State of California Title 22 regulations. They provide resources and referral to help families find child care near their home or work. Their consultants can help families find a child care center or family child care home that meets their needs. They offer materials on finding quality child care, quality infant care, and care for children with special needs. The YMCA also maintains the Centralized Eligibility List (CEL). This list is used by service providers to contact families when openings are available.


APPENDIX B: Free Professional Training SourcesChild Care Training Initiative (Horn of Africa) Provides training for refugee women in child care so they can be licensed for in-home day care.

Child Care Services, Barrio Child Development Center Provides family child care home (FCCH) training in English and Spanish for those interested in becoming state licensed FCCH providers and developing a home-based business.

Child Care Services, Chicano Federation of San Diego County Provides family child care home (FCCH) training in English and Spanish for those interested in becoming state licensed FCCH providers and developing a home-based business.

Child Care Services, City Heights Child Development Center Provides family child care home (FCCH) training in English and Spanish for those interested in becoming state licensed FCCH providers and developing a home-based business.

Health and Safety Community Education Offers a variety of health and safety education classes, including CPR, CPR with Automated External Defibrillator (AED), first aid, water safety, lifeguard training, child care training, and babysitter training with a specific program geared to children.

Health and Safety Community Education, Imperial County Offers a variety of health and safety education classes, including CPR, CPR with Automated External Defibrillator (AED), first aid, water safety, lifeguard training, child care training, and babysitter training with a specific program geared to children.

Infant/Child CPR and Safety, Sharp Grossmont Hospital Offers infant/child CRP and safety classes.

Infant/Child CPR and Safety, Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women Offers infant/child CRP and safety classes.

Microenterprise Family Child care Program, Family Resource Center, Southwestern College Higher Education Center Offers professional training program to set up a home-based licensed child care business, offered in Spanish only.

National Child Care Information and Technical Assistance Center Offers online “Early Childhood Professional Development Systems Toolkit.”

YMCA Child care Resource Service Offers online tools and information on becoming a licensed child care provider.


APPENDIX C: Quality and LicensingQuality child care is a concern not only on a local level but also at a state and national level. The National Association of Governors notes that more than 60% of children between birth and age five today spend time in the care of someone other than their own parent.

The following are the California Community Care licensing requirements for positions with significant responsibility:

1. Fully Qualified Infant Teacher — 12 units of child development (three of these units must be related to the care of infants) and six months of experience in a group child care program for children under five years old.

2. Fully Qualified Preschool Teacher — 12 units of child development and six months of work experience in a group child care program.

3. Fully Qualified School Age Teacher — 12 units in recreation, physical education, social welfare, classes toward a teaching credential, or child development and six months of teaching experience.

4. Aide — 18 years of age or older or a high school graduate and must work under a teacher’s direct supervi-sion. Teachers may be hired with six completed units and must complete two units each semester until the education requirement is met.140

Measuring Quality

In San Diego, as in other places, quality care is often measured using components of the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scales (ECERS) or the Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale (FCCERS).141 Notably, these tools are used in San Diego by organizations such as Preschool for All, the San Diego County Office of Education, and the YMCA to educate families and providers about what constitutes quality. In some cases, these scales are used as a tool for making decisions about funding of programs (See Preschool for All).

The ECERS/FCCRS measures multiple aspects of child development that fall into the following seven categories:

• Personal Care Routines

• Space and Furnishings

• Language-Reasoning

• Activities

• Interactions

• Program Structure

• Parents and Staff

Locally, experts provide their own dimensions of quality. For example, the San Diego County YMCA recommends that parents consider the following:

• Ratio of children to adults

• Group size by age group

• Family involvement — to what extent is the family encouraged to be involved?

• Level of caregiver education

• Rate of staff turnover

• Health and safety

• Accreditation


Additionally, San Diego County Preschool for All uses the following quality criteria constructs to assess their providers:

• Regulatory compliance history

• Fiscal stability

• Curriculum

• Inclusion

• Staff development and support

• Engaging families as partners

• Kindergarten transition

• Learning environment

• Adult/child ratio

• Classroom staff qualifications

Finally, the Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) is another scale to measure the quality of a child care program. Where the ECERS measures the outcome or impact of quality child care the QRIS measures the programs with regard to their operating structure and curriculum. The QRIS standards are composed of the following five common elements:

1. Standards: QRIS standards are built on the foundation of child care licensing requirements and add mul-tiple steps between licensing and higher quality standards, such as those associated with accreditation.

2. Accountability measures: Accountability and monitoring processes are used to determine how well programs meet QRIS standards and to assign ratings.

3. Program and practitioner outreach and support: Support for providers, such as training, mentoring, and technical assistance are included to promote participation and help programs achieve higher levels of quality.

4. Financing incentives: Financial incentives, such as tiered subsidy reimbursement (which pays a higher reimbursement rate to providers who care for children from families who receive CCDF subsidies and meet standards beyond minimum licensing), are awarded to programs when quality levels are achieved.

5. Parent/Consumer education efforts: Most QRIS award easily recognizable symbols, such as stars, to programs to indicate the levels of quality and inform and educate parents.

The QRIS ratings standards have not yet been fully implemented in California. It is anticipated that the QRIS will be utilized statewide within the next several years.


APPENDIX D: Accreditation

Source: National Child care Information and Technical Assistance Center

Organization Setting and Age Level Accreditation Components

Accredited Professional Preschool Learning Environment (Apple)

• Preschool

• School age

• Application and fees

• Self study

• Portfolio

• Onsite verification visit

American Montessori Society (AMS)

• Montessori programs for children birth – high school

• Infant and toddler

• Preschool

• School age


• Self study

• Evidence report

• Onsite peer review visit

Association of Christian Schools International

• Preschool

• School age (elementary and secondary)


• Self study

• Candidacy status


Council on Accreditation (COA)

• Preschool

• School age

• Family and children’s agencies

• Adult day care

• Foster care International adoptions


• Timeline

• Self study report


National Accreditation Commission for Early Care and Education Programs (NAC)

• Child care centers only

• School-age programs (only those that are operated in conjunction with child care centers)


• Self study


National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC)

Academy for Early Childhood Program Accreditation


• Preschool

• School age (kindergarten)


• Self study

• Candidacy report

• Portfolios


National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC)


• Preschool

• School age


• Self study

• Evidence and documentation


National Early Childhood Program Accreditation (NECPA)


• Preschool

• School age


• Self assessment

• Action plan

• Portfolio


National Lutheran School Accreditation (NLSA)


• Preschool

• School age


• Self study


School Name DistrictTotal School

Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Buena Vista Elementary Carlsbad 276 47 17.0 122 44.2 15 YES 69.6Calavera Hills Elementary Carlsbad 610 114 18.7 242 39.7 14.5 NO 58.8Hope Elementary Carlsbad 539 28 5.2 69 12.8 0.9 YES 81.2Jefferson Elementary Carlsbad 729 226 31.0 399 54.7 32.2 NO 60.8Kelly Elementary Carlsbad 477 15 3.1 49 10.3 1.3 YES 87.6Magnolia Elementary Carlsbad 435 31 7.1 89 20.5 7.8 YES 76.8Pacific Rim Elementary Carlsbad 879 25 2.8 58 6.6 1 YES 92.2Poinsettia Elementary Carlsbad 522 86 16.5 139 26.6 9.8 NO 68.7Allen (Ella B.) Elementary Chula Vista 420 83 19.8 127 30.2 17.9 NO 77.4Casillas (Joseph) Elementary Chula Vista 608 154 25.3 168 27.6 19.5 NO 64.9Castle Park Elementary Chula Vista 408 186 45.6 302 74.0 51.6 YES 50.6Chula Vista Hills Elementary Chula Vista 534 128 24.0 164 30.7 20.4 NO 74.4Clear View Chula Vista 522 162 31.0 160 30.7 28.1 YES 66.4Clear View Chula Vista 522 162 31.0 160 30.7 28.1 YES 66.4Cook (Hazel Goes) Elementary Chula Vista 546 171 31.3 348 63.7 27.4 NO 56.6Eastlake Elementary Chula Vista 547 157 28.7 186 34.0 24.1 YES 66.4Finney (Myrtle S.) Elementary Chula Vista 478 214 44.8 289 60.5 48.4 NO 54.1Halecrest Elementary Chula Vista 440 113 25.7 159 36.1 23.5 NO 74.6Harborside Elementary Chula Vista 668 415 62.1 542 81.1 59.5 YES 63.8Hedenkamp Elementary Chula Vista 1007 245 24.3 202 20.1 19.3 YES 75.9Heritage Elementary Chula Vista 883 163 18.5 149 16.9 16.9 NO 79.5Hilltop Drive Elementary Chula Vista 535 173 32.3 302 56.4 31.3 YES 66.8Juarez-Lincoln Elementary Chula Vista 647 288 44.5 378 58.4 38.3 YES 58.5Kellogg (Karl H.) Elementary Chula Vista 368 124 33.7 218 59.2 36.4 NO 61.2Lauderbach (J. Calvin) Elementary Chula Vista 762 528 69.3 623 81.8 61.1 YES 60.9Liberty Elementary Chula Vista 719 121 16.8 97 13.5 14.3 NO 74.0Loma Verde Elementary Chula Vista 503 266 52.9 376 74.8 49.8 NO 53.0Los Altos Elementary Chula Vista 368 209 56.8 266 72.3 52.1 NO 54.8Marshall (Thurgood) Elementary Chula Vista 723 170 23.5 91 12.6 18 YES 76.4


APPENDIX E: San Diego County Elementary School Data


Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Alpine Elementary Alpine 384 24 6.3 125 32.6 7 YES 67.5Boulder Oaks Elementary Alpine 367 9 2.5 82 22.3 3.1 YES 68.8Shadow Hills Elementary Alpine 258 7 2.7 87 33.7 2.3 NO 60.0Bonsall Elementary Bonsall 915 148 16.2 273 29.8 18.2 YES 77.0Bonsall West Elementary Bonsall 453 76 16.8 132 29.1 18.8 NO 80.4Borrego Springs Elementary Borrego Springs 226 66 29.2 169 74.8 52 YES 42.6Anza Elementary Cajon Valley 547 353 64.5 475 86.8 26 Chaldean 19 Arabic 10 NO 37.8Avocado Elementary Cajon Valley 528 120 22.7 210 39.8 11.5 YES 68.1Blossom Valley Elementary Cajon Valley 500 56 11.2 129 25.8 9.1 NO 59.6Bostonia Elementary Cajon Valley 600 213 35.5 412 68.7 21.5 NO 40.8Chase Avenue Elementary Cajon Valley 818 444 54.3 682 83.4 25.1 Chaldean 8.8 Arabic 6.4 NO 34.9Crest Elementary Cajon Valley 129 10 7.8 50 38.8 3.8 NO 61.5Flying Hills Elementary Cajon Valley 483 78 16.1 252 52.2 13 NO 60.8Flying Hills Elementary Cajon Valley 483 78 16.1 252 52.2 13 NO 60.8Fuerte Elementary Cajon Valley 574 62 10.8 92 16.0 3.8 YES 81.5Jamacha Elementary Cajon Valley 438 102 23.3 160 36.5 7.9 Chaldean 7 NO 68.7Johnson Elementary Cajon Valley 644 350 54.3 554 86.0 47.8 NO 32.8Lexington Elementary Cajon Valley 734 529 72.1 696 94.8 47.7 Chaldean 7.1 Arabic 6.6 NO 29.3Madison Ave Elementary Cajon Valley 433 140 32.3 278 64.2 22 NO 47.8Magnolia Elementary Cajon Valley 540 215 39.8 443 82.0 27.7 NO 41.9Meridian Elementary Cajon Valley 658 266 40.4 425 64.6 14.3 Chaldean 7.1 NO 43.1Naranca Elementary Cajon Valley 730 428 58.6 624 85.5 43.3 NO 35.3Rancho San Diego Elementary Cajon Valley 538 111 20.6 148 27.5 5.1 NO 67.8Rios Elementary Cajon Valley 298 74 24.8 173 58.1 16.9 NO 54.8Vista Grande Elementary Cajon Valley 547 84 15.4 97 17.7 4.7 Chaldean 6.6 NO 79.3W. D. Hall Elementary Cajon Valley 436 148 33.9 245 56.2 15.1 Chaldean 8.2 Arabic 5.6 NO 43.8Ada W. Harris Elementary Cardiff 388 49 12.6 76 19.6 12.3 NO 83.1Cardiff Elementary Cardiff 377 26 6.9 44 11.7 14.2 YES 82.1Aviara Oaks Elementary Carlsbad 744 51 6.9 91 12.2 4.2 YES 83.2


*Data in columns 1-7, 11 and 12 are for 2010-2011 and columns 8-10 are for 2009-2010 school year. All data were retrieved on or before 10/12/2011 from http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ and may not reflect later periodic adjustments made by the CDE.


Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Sycamore Ridge Del Mar 472 52 11.0 57 12.1 4.6 YES 89.9Torrey Hills Del Mar 716 105 14.7 23 3.2 2.2 Korean 6.8 YES 87.8Capri Elementary Encinitas 653 155 23.7 181 27.7 21.1 NO 70.0El Camino Creek Elementary Encinitas 840 8 1.0 10 1.2 0.4 YES 92.6Flora Vista Elementary Encinitas 479 31 6.5 37 7.7 3.2 YES 84.4La Costa Heights Elementary Encinitas 630 38 6.0 48 7.6 3.9 YES 81.1Mission Estancia Elementary Encinitas 600 17 2.8 30 5.0 1.7 YES 86.8Ocean Knoll Elementary Encinitas 480 182 37.9 229 47.7 39 NO 69.9Olivenhain Pioneer Elementary Encinitas 673 13 1.9 17 2.5 0.7 YES 89.9Park Dale Lane Elementary Encinitas 596 101 16.9 153 25.7 14.8 NO 72.9Paul Ecke-Central Elementary Encinitas 507 91 17.9 138 27.2 19 YES 73.5Bernardo Elementary Escondido 603 64 10.6 123 20.4 6.2 YES 80.4Central Elementary Escondido 836 608 72.7 746 89.2 71.2 NO 33.6Central Elementary Escondido 836 608 72.7 746 89.2 71.2 NO 33.6Conway Elementary Escondido 723 411 56.8 542 75.0 54.4 NO 34.8Farr Avenue Elementary Escondido 757 570 75.3 705 93.1 75.8 NO 33.3Felicita Elementary Escondido 648 495 76.4 603 93.1 77.1 NO 31.4Glen View Elementary Escondido 762 441 57.9 607 79.7 58.2 NO 35.8Juniper Elementary Escondido 807 513 63.6 681 84.4 61 NO 36.2L. R. Green Elementary Escondido 742 127 17.1 223 30.1 15.4 YES 77.0Lincoln Elementary Escondido 648 473 73.0 596 92.0 75.3 NO 41.7Miller Elementary Escondido 549 167 30.4 288 52.5 27.9 NO 52.8North Broadway Elementary Escondido 576 153 26.6 281 48.8 27.2 NO 55.2Oak Hill Elementary Escondido 946 597 63.1 781 82.6 60.2 NO 36.8Orange Glen Elementary Escondido 754 373 49.5 537 71.2 50.5 NO 50.3Pioneer Elementary Escondido 786 604 76.8 749 95.3 82.4 NO 36.1Reidy Creek Elementary Escondido 692 129 18.6 188 27.2 13.6 NO 66.7Rock Springs Elementary Escondido 682 353 51.8 514 75.4 46.4 NO 38.6Rose Elementary Escondido 617 418 67.7 526 85.3 66.1 NO 30.6



Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

McMillin (Corky) Elementary Chula Vista 859 222 25.8 166 19.3 19.7 NO 70.3Montgomery (John J.) Elementary Chula Vista 362 264 72.9 313 86.5 79.6 YES 65.3Olympic View Elementary Chula Vista 783 202 25.8 179 22.9 22.4 NO 76.0Otay Elementary Chula Vista 588 378 64.3 458 77.9 70.6 YES 66.3Palomar Elementary Chula Vista 373 153 41.0 227 60.9 36.7 YES 60.2Parkview Elementary Chula Vista 415 147 35.4 161 38.8 41.2 YES 63.8Rice (Lilian J.) Elementary Chula Vista 703 341 48.5 504 71.7 45.7 NO 45.9Rogers (Greg) Elementary Chula Vista 495 121 24.4 205 41.4 22.1 NO 54.7Rohr (Fred H.) Elementary Chula Vista 418 162 38.8 277 66.3 39.5 YES 57.0Rosebank Elementary Chula Vista 637 196 30.8 324 50.9 24.6 YES 60.1Salt Creek Elementary Chula Vista 975 232 23.8 99 10.2 20.5 YES 76.7Silver Wing Elementary Chula Vista 418 199 47.6 282 67.5 56 NO 58.6Sunnyside Elementary Chula Vista 408 89 21.8 107 26.2 21 NO 72.1Sunnyside Elementary Chula Vista 408 89 21.8 107 26.2 21 NO 72.1Tiffany (Burton C.) Elementary Chula Vista 550 102 18.5 142 25.8 20.2 NO 71.7Valle Lindo Elementary Chula Vista 561 223 39.8 272 48.5 36.2 YES 56.3Valley Vista Elementary Chula Vista 522 119 22.8 177 33.9 19.3 YES 62.5Veterans Elementary Chula Vista 783 167 21.3 134 17.1 18.5 NO 74.5Vista Square Elementary Chula Vista 603 290 48.1 421 69.8 47.9 YES 52.4Wolf Canyon Elementary Chula Vista 842 205 24.3 201 23.9 22.3 NO 77.0Coronado Village Elementary Coronado 931 20 2.1 80 8.6 1.9 YES 83.1Silver Strand Elementary Coronado 353 15 4.2 55 15.6 2.1 YES 77.6Dehesa Elementary Dehesa 208 24 11.5 59 28.4 12.6 YES 48.9Ashley Falls Elementary Del Mar 443 11 2.5 5 1.1 0.8 YES 90.3Carmel Del Mar Elementary Del Mar 478 60 12.6 32 6.7 1.8 Korean 5.3 YES 85.9Del Mar Heights Elementary Del Mar 431 18 4.2 16 3.7 1.1 YES 89.2Del Mar Hills Elementary Del Mar 312 25 8.0 36 11.5 5.7 YES 80.5Ocean Air Del Mar 744 37 5.0 11 1.5 0 YES 93.5Sage Canyon Del Mar 762 35 4.6 2 0.3 0.9 YES 93.8



Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Lemon Crest Elementary Lakeside 552 58 10.5 268 48.6 7.2 NO 57.3Lindo Park Elementary Lakeside 529 100 18.9 351 66.4 18.4 NO 51.1Riverview Elementary Lakeside 500 29 5.8 167 33.4 11.5 YES 67.0Winter Gardens Elementary Lakeside 191 45 23.6 111 58.1 19 NO 27.4Golden Avenue Elementary Lemon Grove 513 187 36.5 510 99.4 36.2 YES 52.7Monterey Heights Elementary Lemon Grove 481 133 27.7 480 99.8 21.9 NO 53.0Mt. Vernon Elementary Lemon Grove 539 195 36.2 535 99.3 29.2 NO 44.9San Altos Elementary Lemon Grove 418 116 27.8 417 99.8 22.5 YES 49.2San Miguel Elementary Lemon Grove 580 218 37.6 574 99.0 27.8 Somali 7.8 NO 47.7Vista la Mesa Elementary Lemon Grove 677 177 26.1 673 99.4 13.8 YES 45.8Campo Elementary Mountain Empire 399 47 11.8 259 64.9 13.2 NO 48.3Clover Flat Elementary Mountain Empire 160 31 19.4 94 58.8 22.6 YES 66.1Descanso Elementary Mountain Empire 124 5 4.0 39 31.5 5.4 YES 75.1Descanso Elementary Mountain Empire 124 5 4.0 39 31.5 5.4 YES 75.1Jacumba Elementary Mountain Empire 57 5 8.8 37 64.9 28 YES N/APine Valley Elementary Mountain Empire 108 4 3.7 43 39.8 4.2 YES 55.8Potrero Elementary Mountain Empire 236 170 72.0 207 87.7 81.8 YES 31.0Central Elementary National (City) 665 439 66.0 665 100.0 69 NO 44.5El Toyon Elementary National (City) 445 329 73.9 445 100.0 69.1 NO 44.6Ira Harbison National (City) 604 296 49.0 604 100.0 32.7 Filipino 17.1 NO 58.2John A. Otis Elementary National (City) 454 349 76.9 454 100.0 66.4 Filipino 5.3 NO 48.7Kimball National (City) 399 318 79.7 399 100.0 79.3 NO 44.8Las Palmas National (City) 725 501 69.1 725 100.0 61.2 Filipino 8.5 NO 47.0Lincoln Acres National (City) 634 439 69.2 634 100.0 69.7 NO 37.9Olivewood National (City) 698 453 64.9 573 82.1 74 NO 48.2Palmer Way National (City) 610 357 58.5 610 100.0 45.7 Filipino 17.9 NO 53.9Rancho de la Nacion National (City) 528 328 62.1 528 100.0 65.5 Filipino 9 NO 45.6Christa McAuliffe Elementary Oceanside 714 118 16.5 335 46.9 19.2 NO 67.1Del Rio Elementary Oceanside 505 209 41.4 387 76.6 40.7 NO 37.7



Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Fallbrook Street Elementary Fallbrook 712 417 58.6 566 79.5 57 NO 37.3Iowa Street Fallbrook 410 28 6.8 33 8.0 7.8 NO 69.6La Paloma Elementary Fallbrook 749 372 49.7 543 72.5 43 NO 52.1Live Oak Elementary Fallbrook 745 300 40.3 507 68.1 34 NO 52.7Mary Fay Pendleton Elementary Fallbrook 898 27 3.0 279 31.1 2.7 YES 69.8San Onofre Elementary Fallbrook 797 22 2.8 418 52.4 1.2 YES 71.1William H. Frazier Elementary Fallbrook 656 306 46.6 463 70.6 40.2 NO 47.2Jamul Primary Jamul-Dulzura 260 74 28.5 119 45.8 24.8 YES 47.1Julian Elementary Julian 274 26 9.5 114 41.6 14.5 NO 56.3Avondale Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 445 181 40.7 344 77.3 34.7 NO 51.2Bancroft Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 553 209 37.8 472 85.4 36.2 NO 43.7Casa de Oro Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 355 96 27.0 259 73.0 25.2 NO 44.9Fletcher Hills Elementary 570 33 5.8 140 24.6 3.2 NO 71.2Fletcher Hills Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 570 33 5.8 140 24.6 3.2 NO 71.2Highlands Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 498 113 22.7 324 65.1 21.3 NO 54.1Kempton Street Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 690 423 61.3 635 92.0 62 NO 31.9La Mesa Dale Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 394 101 25.6 268 68.0 18.8 YES 55.6La Presa Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 387 138 35.7 325 84.0 36.5 YES 46.7Lemon Avenue Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 550 28 5.1 168 30.5 3.5 YES 68.7Loma Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 469 117 24.9 281 59.9 18.1 NO 50.5Maryland Avenue Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 313 42 13.4 143 45.7 4.7 YES 64.3Murdock Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 636 51 8.0 157 24.7 5.3 NO 74.8Murray Manor Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 694 54 7.8 199 28.7 4.2 YES 78.1Northmont Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 442 77 17.4 185 41.9 11.3 NO 62.4Rancho Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 364 109 29.9 264 72.5 31.2 NO 59.5Rolando Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 553 73 13.2 254 45.9 9.5 NO 69.0Sweetwater Springs Elementary La Mesa-Spring Valley 458 119 26.0 264 57.6 20.5 YES 56.3Lakeside Farms Elementary Lakeside 540 38 7.0 230 42.6 16.7 YES 62.6Lakeview Elementary Lakeside 584 20 3.4 204 34.9 3.3 YES 62.0




Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Pomerado Elementary Poway 500 149 29.8 188 37.6 19.3 YES 73.3Rolling Hills Elementary Poway 384 102 26.6 90 23.4 4.1 Filipino 7.1 YES 82.3Shoal Creek Elementary Poway 624 100 16.0 49 7.9 1.9 NO 82.0Stone Ranch Elementary Poway 1069 254 23.8 51 4.8 1.4 YES 91.0Sundance Elementary Poway 476 69 14.5 77 16.2 1.8 YES 85.0Sunset Hills Elementary Poway 392 54 13.8 55 14.0 1.2 NO 80.4Tierra Bonita Elementary Poway 474 41 8.6 46 9.7 3.7 YES 82.8Turtleback Elementary Poway 540 80 14.8 66 12.2 1.9 YES 82.0Valley Elementary Poway 713 320 44.9 347 48.7 32.1 NO 56.6Westwood Elementary Poway 740 125 16.9 76 10.3 1.9 YES 77.1Willow Grove Elementary Poway 815 144 17.7 99 12.1 4.4 YES 89.1Barnett Elementary Ramona 469 55 11.7 124 26.4 10 YES 68.2Hanson Elementary Ramona 612 203 33.2 285 46.6 28.7 NO 54.8Hanson Elementary Ramona 612 203 33.2 285 46.6 28.7 NO 54.8James Dukes Elementary Ramona 572 15 2.6 71 12.4 1.7 YES 79.7Mt. Woodson Elementary Ramona 507 155 30.6 205 40.4 32.5 YES 70.2Ramona Elementary Ramona 478 228 47.7 316 66.1 46.9 NO 57.1R. Roger Rowe Elementary Rancho Santa Fe 509 27 5.3 5 1.0 4.2 YES 89.7Adams Elementary San Diego 333 187 56.2 327 98.2 53.9 NO 44.6Alcott Elementary San Diego 232 95 40.9 144 62.1 31.3 YES 60.1Angier Elementary San Diego 465 74 15.9 298 64.1 8.6 YES 74.4Audubon Elementary San Diego 570 285 50.0 565 99.1 44.2 NO 40.0Baker Elementary San Diego 418 309 73.9 413 98.8 70.4 NO 40.5Balboa Elementary San Diego 600 380 63.3 593 98.8 67.1 NO 41.8Barnard Elementary San Diego 275 75 27.3 153 55.6 23.4 NO 65.5Bay Park Elementary San Diego 500 73 14.6 183 36.6 11.9 NO 74.6Bayview Terrace Elementary San Diego 224 136 60.7 221 98.7 67.9 NO 37.9Benchley/Weinberger Elementary San Diego 542 69 12.7 128 23.6 6 YES 85.5Bethune Elementary San Diego 724 199 27.5 457 63.1 14.6 NO 59.7


Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

E. G. Garrison Elementary Oceanside 450 184 40.9 334 74.2 45 NO 50.0Ivey Ranch Elementary Oceanside 783 59 7.5 239 30.5 6.8 YES 73.7Laurel Elementary Oceanside 547 330 60.3 486 88.8 55.9 NO 32.8Libby Elementary Oceanside 510 307 60.2 472 92.5 65.5 NO 38.7Louise Foussat Elementary Oceanside 759 177 23.3 474 62.5 31.8 YES 56.9Mission Elementary Oceanside 603 391 64.8 543 90.0 64.4 NO 34.8Nichols Elementary Oceanside 794 245 30.9 410 51.6 26.6 NO 51.6North Terrace Elementary Oceanside 672 42 6.3 354 52.7 4 NO 64.9Palmquist Elementary Oceanside 588 156 26.5 300 51.0 34.4 YES 66.8Reynolds Elementary Oceanside 685 231 33.7 450 65.7 33.3 NO 48.2San Luis Rey Elementary Oceanside 440 155 35.2 308 70.0 33.3 NO 43.9Santa Margarita Elementary Oceanside 514 3 0.6 235 45.7 1.8 NO 54.8South Oceanside Elementary Oceanside 724 177 24.4 438 60.5 28.9 NO 54.5South Oceanside Elementary Oceanside 724 177 24.4 438 60.5 28.9 NO 54.5Stuart Mesa Elementary Oceanside 588 23 3.9 259 44.0 2.3 YES 61.0Adobe Bluffs Elementary Poway 402 54 13.4 43 10.7 0 YES 85.5Canyon View Elementary Poway 499 111 22.2 50 10.0 3.3 YES 85.1Chaparral Elementary Poway 846 113 13.4 66 7.8 5 YES 83.3Creekside Elementary Poway 672 121 18.0 23 3.4 2.5 YES 90.7Deer Canyon Elementary Poway 509 104 20.4 41 8.1 0 YES 86.7Del Sur Elementary Poway 398 50 12.6 65 16.3 4.9 YES 87.8Garden Road Elementary Poway 465 51 11.0 101 21.7 6.1 YES 83.8Highland Ranch Elementary Poway 737 170 23.1 83 11.3 2.7 YES 77.7Los Penasquitos Elementary Poway 513 172 33.5 208 40.5 10.2 YES 81.6Midland Elementary Poway 627 157 25.0 208 33.2 16.6 NO 77.6Monterey Ridge Elementary Poway 959 207 21.6 92 9.6 3.3 YES 89.2Morning Creek Elementary Poway 721 152 21.1 106 14.7 3.2 YES 79.3Painted Rock Elementary Poway 580 42 7.2 41 7.1 1.9 YES 83.8Park Village Elementary Poway 695 150 21.6 36 5.2 0 YES 89.4




Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Field Elementary San Diego 281 153 54.4 239 85.1 48.6 NO 51.6Fletcher Elementary San Diego 268 65 24.3 136 50.7 4.1 Vietnamese 5.9 NO 65.6Florence Elementary San Diego 313 123 39.3 215 68.7 31.5 YES 66.3Foster Elementary San Diego 430 98 22.8 233 54.2 15.7 NO 54.1Franklin Elementary San Diego 249 159 63.9 247 99.2 43.1 Vietnamese 24.9 NO 53.0Freese Elementary San Diego 445 189 42.5 438 98.4 34.4 NO 48.9Fulton Elementary San Diego 397 122 30.7 393 99.0 17.3 NO 37.5Gage Elementary San Diego 425 105 24.7 216 50.8 11.4 YES 57.9Garfield Elementary San Diego 371 190 51.2 365 98.4 38.3 YES 66.7Golden Hill Elementary San Diego 524 350 66.8 521 99.4 70.8 NO 39.7Grant Elementary San Diego 594 55 9.3 131 22.1 6.2 YES 86.8Green Elementary San Diego 508 65 12.8 177 34.8 6.3 YES 76.7Hage Elementary San Diego 738 221 29.9 232 31.4 6.4 Filipino 6.8 NO 72.9Hage Elementary San Diego 738 221 29.9 232 31.4 6.4 Vietnamese 10.4 Filipino 6.8 NO 72.9Hamilton Elementary San Diego 582 445 76.5 580 99.7 63.6 NO 28.3Hancock Elementary San Diego 767 52 6.8 525 68.4 4.1 NO 58.4Hardy Elementary San Diego 374 150 40.1 218 58.3 13.1 Vietnamese 17.3 YES 77.2Hawthorne Elementary San Diego 359 154 42.9 280 78.0 32 NO 62.5Hearst Elementary San Diego 512 47 9.2 79 15.4 4 YES 87.0Hickman Elementary San Diego 650 212 32.6 281 43.2 5.2 Filipino 6.7 Vietnamese 12.9 NO 73.6Holmes Elementary San Diego 525 27 5.1 123 23.4 3.1 YES 76.4Horton Elementary San Diego 538 345 64.1 530 98.5 64.1 NO 37.6Ibarra Elementary San Diego 576 454 78.8 573 99.5 56.6 Vietnamese 8.2 Somali 5.6 NO 34.1Jefferson Elementary San Diego 351 177 50.4 348 99.1 46.1 NO 49.5Jerabek Elementary San Diego 695 31 4.5 45 6.5 1 YES 86.2John Muir San Diego 389 89 22.9 236 60.7 16.6 YES 65.3Johnson Elementary San Diego 529 168 31.8 525 99.2 25.6 NO 47.6Jones Elementary San Diego 345 69 20.0 190 55.1 10.4 YES 74.7Joyner Elementary San Diego 652 475 72.9 648 99.4 65.4 NO 41.7


Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Bird Rock Elementary San Diego 508 34 6.7 38 7.5 1.3 YES 90.3Birney Elementary San Diego 457 145 31.7 292 63.9 27.8 NO 70.0Boone Elementary San Diego 562 232 41.3 444 79.0 20.1 Filipino 12.7 NO 52.8Burbank Elementary San Diego 401 296 73.8 395 98.5 81.1 NO 30.8Cabrillo Elementary San Diego 194 63 32.5 139 71.6 35.6 NO 47.9Cadman Elementary San Diego 150 65 43.3 104 69.3 40.9 YES 41.9Carson Elementary San Diego 549 395 71.9 544 99.1 51.7 Vietnamese 8.5 NO 52.3Carver Elementary San Diego 317 153 48.3 314 99.1 29.5 Somali 14.4 Vietnamese 5.3 NO 36.5Central Elementary San Diego 722 619 85.7 711 98.5 62 Vietnamese 12 NO 39.8Chavez Elementary San Diego 637 453 71.1 634 99.5 71 NO 40.1Cherokee Point Elementary San Diego 502 360 71.7 498 99.2 71.2 NO 39.6Chesterton Elementary San Diego 515 155 30.1 313 60.8 7.1 Vietnamese 13.6 NO 66.7Chollas/Mead Elementary San Diego 737 478 64.9 727 98.6 57.7 Lao 5.3 NO 43.0Chollas/Mead Elementary San Diego 737 478 64.9 727 98.6 57.7 Lao 5.3 NO 43.0Clay Elementary San Diego 264 73 27.7 264 100.0 21.2 NO 47.3Crown Point Elementary San Diego 263 80 30.4 176 66.9 37.1 YES 64.4Cubberley Elementary San Diego 233 57 24.5 140 60.1 14.5 YES 59.4Curie Elementary San Diego 588 92 15.6 82 13.9 5.3 YES 84.5Dailard Elementary San Diego 550 47 8.5 127 23.1 7.2 NO 77.3Dewey Elementary San Diego 438 98 22.4 321 73.3 17.1 Japanese 6.1 NO 57.5Dingeman Elementary San Diego 794 148 18.6 40 5.0 1.8 YES 93.1Doyle Elementary San Diego 767 281 36.6 196 25.6 6 Japanese 6.9 YES 80.7Edison Elementary San Diego 600 446 74.3 593 98.8 72.6 YES 67.1Emerson/Bandini Elementary San Diego 640 474 74.1 634 99.1 79.1 YES 39.0Encanto Elementary San Diego 614 365 59.4 605 98.5 61.2 NO 46.6Ericson Elementary San Diego 748 270 36.1 292 39.0 5 Filipino 10.3 Vietnamese 8.2 YES 79.6Euclid Elementary San Diego 658 521 79.2 653 99.2 65.2 Vietnamese 8.3 NO 51.8Explorer Elementary San Diego 342 39 11.4 55 16.1 1.2 YES 76.8Fay Elementary San Diego 695 543 78.1 685 98.6 56.6 Vietnamese 6.2 Khmer 5.7 NO 41.1




Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Rodriguez Elementary San Diego 573 481 83.9 569 99.3 87.7 NO 29.3Rolando Park Elementary San Diego 205 98 47.8 169 82.4 34.6 NO 45.3Rosa Parks Elementary San Diego 881 733 83.2 867 98.4 71.5 YES 45.8Ross Elementary San Diego 366 191 52.2 298 81.4 29.2 Vietnamese 12.1 YES 61.5Rowan Elementary San Diego 268 109 40.7 265 98.9 35.1 NO 41.9Sandburg Elementary San Diego 708 236 33.3 259 36.6 4 Vietnamese 12.1 YES 77.4Scripps Elementary San Diego 662 97 14.7 32 4.8 0.8 YES 89.1Sequoia Elementary San Diego 250 74 29.6 161 64.4 25.8 NO 55.3Sessions Elementary San Diego 398 27 6.8 83 20.9 5.8 YES 74.4Sherman Elementary San Diego 477 367 76.9 468 98.1 81.7 YES 41.7Silver Gate Elementary San Diego 540 29 5.4 95 17.6 3.8 NO 79.9Spreckels Elementary San Diego 840 230 27.4 328 39.0 27.1 NO 71.8Sunset View Elementary San Diego 441 43 9.8 82 18.6 7.1 YES 83.7Sunset View Elementary San Diego 441 43 9.8 82 18.6 7.1 YES 83.7Tierrasanta Elementary San Diego 497 83 16.7 160 32.2 12.7 YES 78.4Toler Elementary San Diego 267 106 39.7 153 57.3 37.4 YES 66.1Torrey Pines Elementary San Diego 446 84 18.8 51 11.4 8.3 Korean 5.2 YES 97.7Valencia Park Elementary San Diego 520 210 40.4 518 99.6 25 NO 43.3Vista Grande Elementary San Diego 390 70 17.9 196 50.3 17.1 YES 72.6Walker Elementary San Diego 576 242 42.0 368 63.9 17.5 Filipino 10.9 NO 54.2Washington Elementary San Diego 293 151 51.5 223 76.1 47.3 NO 47.6Webster Elementary San Diego 418 174 41.6 418 100.0 39.7 NO 52.4Wegeforth Elementary San Diego 267 71 26.6 173 64.8 16.4 Vietnamese 5.6 NO 67.5Whitman Elementary San Diego 315 122 38.7 229 72.7 34 YES 58.3Zamorano Elementary San Diego 1366 457 33.5 934 68.4 15.6 Filipino 8.8 YES 68.1Alvin M. Dunn Elementary San Marcos 617 145 23.5 530 85.9 64.4 NO 51.9Carrillo Elementary San Marcos 942 64 6.8 156 16.6 4.7 YES 88.7Joli Ann Leichtag Elementary San Marcos 820 404 49.3 605 73.8 48.8 NO 69.6Knob Hill Elementary San Marcos 836 207 24.8 418 50.0 22.7 NO 74.9


Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Juarez Elementary San Diego 259 103 39.8 179 69.1 26.9 YES 56.2Kimbrough Elementary San Diego 543 442 81.4 538 99.1 83 YES 45.8Knox Elementary San Diego 635 357 56.2 624 98.3 52.2 NO 35.9Kumeyaay Elementary San Diego 499 58 11.6 86 17.2 3.1 YES 82.9La Jolla Elementary San Diego 622 81 13.0 48 7.7 7.1 YES 92.6Lafayette Elementary San Diego 299 102 34.1 200 66.9 22.3 NO 58.2Lee Elementary San Diego 435 173 39.8 350 80.5 32.2 NO 53.4Linda Vista Elementary San Diego 493 377 76.5 489 99.2 63.6 Vietnamese 6.1 NO 42.6Lindbergh/Schweitzer Elementary San Diego 624 165 26.4 401 64.3 12.3 NO 67.0Logan Elementary San Diego 620 485 78.2 611 98.5 77 NO 40.0Loma Portal Elementary San Diego 408 67 16.4 162 39.7 14.6 NO 76.5Longfellow San Diego 739 26 3.5 356 48.2 3.4 NO 64.4Marshall Elementary San Diego 526 403 76.6 518 98.5 44.7 Somali 9.8 NO 28.2Marshall Elementary San Diego 526 403 76.6 518 98.5 44.7 Somali 9.8 NO 28.2Marvin Elementary San Diego 328 35 10.7 87 26.5 11.9 YES 80.4Mason Elementary San Diego 775 273 35.2 414 53.4 12.8 Filipino 12.1 Vietnames 6.2 YES 66.9McKinley Elementary San Diego 424 105 24.8 237 55.9 25.6 YES 70.6Miller Elementary San Diego 739 31 4.2 463 62.7 2.6 YES 54.9Miramar Ranch Elementary San Diego 758 104 13.7 98 12.9 2.1 YES 78.2Normal Heights Elementary San Diego 320 200 62.5 315 98.4 55.1 YES 51.6Nye Elementary San Diego 593 206 34.7 412 69.5 14 Filipino 20 NO 62.7Oak Park Elementary San Diego 699 340 48.6 695 99.4 27.8 Vietnamese 12.1 NO 48.1Ocean Beach Elementary San Diego 406 82 20.2 232 57.1 19.6 NO 78.4Pacific Beach Elementary San Diego 348 126 36.2 161 46.3 35.9 NO 75.0Paradise Hills Elementary San Diego 322 133 41.3 263 81.7 34.5 Filipino 11.9 YES 63.9Penn Elementary San Diego 430 139 32.3 300 69.8 18.3 Filipino 6.2 NO 59.7Perkins Elementary San Diego 505 308 61.0 497 98.4 75.6 NO 35.1Perry Elementary San Diego 394 85 21.6 267 67.8 7.5 Filipino 8 NO 64.4Porter Elementary San Diego 798 496 62.2 791 99.1 53.5 NO 40.7

97.4




Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Bayside Elementary South Bay 542 245 45.2 487 89.9 41.6 NO 42.5Central Elementary South Bay 601 280 46.6 525 87.4 49.7 NO 42.4Emory Elementary South Bay 703 237 33.7 496 70.6 33.5 NO 51.6George Nicoloff South Bay 874 563 64.4 794 90.8 71.2 NO 32.7Godfrey G. Berry South Bay 580 286 49.3 514 88.6 49.7 NO 40.3Howard Pence South Bay 642 305 47.5 526 81.9 49.1 NO 42.9Imperial Beach South Bay 845 163 19.3 535 63.3 22.6 NO 56.3Oneonta Elementary South Bay 506 185 36.6 409 80.8 35.6 NO 49.6Sunnyslope Elementary South Bay 552 297 53.8 459 83.2 59.2 NO 39.5Teofilo Mendoza South Bay 958 435 45.4 644 67.2 47.9 NO 51.1West View Elementary South Bay 131 34 26.0 69 52.7 20.6 NO N/ASpencer Valley Elementary Spencer Valley 26 0 0.0 7 26.9 2.8 YES N/AVallecitos Elementary Vallecitos 211 112 53.1 177 83.9 47.5 NO 56.4Vallecitos Elementary Vallecitos 211 112 53.1 177 83.9 47.5 NO 56.4Lilac Valley Center Pauma 548 168 30.7 241 44.0 29.4 YES 63.7Pauma Elementary Valley Center Pauma 259 134 51.7 219 84.6 49.3 YES 41.3Valley Center Elementary Valley Center Pauma 523 125 23.9 276 52.8 25 NO 57.3Valley Center Primary Valley Center Pauma 554 224 40.4 330 59.6 35.9 YES 65.0Alamosa Park Elementary Vista 526 72 13.7 151 28.7 12.1 NO 64.4Beaumont Elementary Vista 558 268 48.0 409 73.3 49.8 NO 45.5Bobier Elementary Vista 669 447 66.8 613 91.6 73.7 NO 39.2Breeze Hill Elementary Vista 818 259 31.7 424 51.8 31.8 NO 61.3California Avenue Elementary Vista 36 13 36.1 10 27.8 19.5 YES N/ACrestview Elementary Vista 597 357 59.8 516 86.4 55 NO 39.1Empresa Elementary Vista 714 97 13.6 197 27.6 13.1 YES 70.0Foothill Oak Elementary Vista 637 425 66.7 589 92.5 65.6 NO 34.9Grapevine Elementary Vista 599 332 55.4 516 86.1 53.1 NO 44.2Hannalei Elementary Vista 553 185 33.5 332 60.0 34.6 YES 52.9Lake Elementary Vista 765 61 8.0 147 19.2 4.3 NO 71.1


Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

La Costa Meadows Elementary San Marcos 890 74 8.3 140 15.7 5.2 YES 81.2Paloma Elementary San Marcos 900 231 25.7 331 36.8 24.1 NO 81.7Richland Elementary San Marcos 729 151 20.7 318 43.6 31.7 NO 77.3San Elijo Elementary San Marcos 1108 98 8.8 133 12.0 5.3 YES 85.7San Marcos Elementary San Marcos 809 644 79.6 702 86.8 72.8 NO 50.3Twin Oaks Elementary San Marcos 774 244 31.5 408 52.7 32.9 NO 73.1San Pasqual Union Elementary San Pasqual 533 75 14.1 24 4.5 10.9 NO 74.2Beyer Elementary San Ysidro 372 330 88.7 307 82.5 84.9 NO 19.5La Mirada Elementary San Ysidro 528 311 58.9 386 73.1 72.1 YES 48.6Ocean View Hills San Ysidro 1211 430 35.5 481 39.7 34.7 YES 66.5Smythe Elementary San Ysidro 536 433 80.8 362 67.5 80.7 NO 36.8Sunset Elementary San Ysidro 758 568 74.9 570 75.2 72.8 YES 57.2Willow Elementary San Ysidro 842 686 81.5 619 73.5 NO 35.1Willow Elementary San Ysidro 842 686 81.5 619 73.5 NO 35.1Cajon Park Elementary Santee 1049 51 4.9 312 29.7 1 NO 73.5Carlton Hills Elementary Santee 515 26 5.0 228 44.3 4.1 YES 74.8Carlton Oaks Elementary Santee 888 29 3.3 236 26.6 1.9 NO 75.4Chet F. Harritt Elementary Santee 584 45 7.7 276 47.3 4.8 NO 66.7Hill Creek Elementary Santee 783 59 7.5 288 36.8 4.9 NO 64.2Pepper Drive Elementary Santee 713 82 11.5 371 52.0 10.4 NO 67.2Prospect Avenue Elementary Santee 490 79 16.1 321 65.5 5.9 NO 58.1Rio Seco Elementary Santee 944 58 6.1 281 29.8 4 YES 75.1Sycamore Canyon Elementary Santee 329 14 4.3 77 23.4 3.5 YES 73.7Carmel Creek Elementary Solana Beach 503 88 17.5 23 4.6 1.1 YES 89.9Skyline Elementary Solana Beach 497 51 10.3 74 14.9 10 YES 88.8Solana Highlands Elementary Solana Beach 550 57 10.4 15 2.7 0 YES 89.1Solana Pacific Elementary Solana Beach 474 20 4.2 20 4.2 0.8 YES 91.4Solana Santa Fe Elementary Solana Beach 408 35 8.6 27 6.6 3.6 YES 86.4Solana Vista Elementary Solana Beach 438 95 21.7 103 23.5 18.3 YES 74.5


Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students

at School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language in

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

% of Students

Reporting

Other

Language in

2009 (If <5%)

Made AYP

2010-2011 For

English-

Language Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011

California

Standards

Test English

Language

Arts

Maryland Elementary Vista 594 404 68.0 563 94.8 73.1 YES 43.3Mission Meadows Elementary Vista 548 159 29.0 264 48.2 27.4 NO 51.7Monte Vista Elementary Vista 543 145 26.7 284 52.3 34 NO 60.1Olive Elementary Vista 433 231 53.3 394 91.0 69.4 YES 47.2Temple Heights Elementary Vista 648 179 27.6 384 59.3 30 YES 60.0Warner Elementary Warner 106 19 17.9 88 83.0 14.1 NO 27.8



APPENDIX F SAN DIEGO COUNTY MIDDLE SCHOOL DATA


Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language

in 2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language

in 2009

Made AYP

2010-2011

For English-

Language

Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011 California

Standards Test

English

Language Arts

Palm Middle School Lemon Grove 626 141 22.5 623 99.5 15.9 NO 47.99Cesar Chavez Middle School Oceanside Unified 816 130 15.9 606 74.3 26.2 NO 52.26Jefferson Middle School Oceanside Unified 1134 190 16.8 759 66.9 17.7 NO 41.11Lincoln Middle School Oceanside Unified 867 144 16.6 553 63.8 24.6 NO 47.65Martin Luther King Jr. Middle School Oceanside Unified 1479 97 6.6 707 47.8 10.4 NO 67.36Bernardo Heights Middle School Poway Unified 1,357 99 7.3 168 12.4 1.9 YES 81.62Black Mountain Middle School Poway Unified 1,319 123 9.3 306 23.2 3.0 Tagalog 2.9 NO 77.01Meadowbrook Middle School Poway Unified 1,255 141 11.2 304 24.2 5.7 NO 73.26Mesa Verde Middle School Poway Unified 1,295 50 3.9 132 10.2 0.0 Vietnamese 1.1 YES 87.69Oak Valley Middle School Poway Unified 1,335 79 5.9 148 11.1 2.0 NO 84.36Twin Peaks Middle School Poway Unified 1,241 69 5.6 176 14.2 5.4 NO 79.99Olive Peirce Middle School Ramona City Unified 849 85 10.0 320 37.7 11.2 NO 67.44R. Roger Rowe Middle School Rancho Santa Fe 188 8 4.3 4 2.1 1.6 YES 96.17Albert Einstein Academy Middle School San Diego Unified 284 41 14.4 103 36.3 17.2 NO 70.96Bell Middle School San Diego Unified 1,056 226 21.4 762 72.2 13.7 Tagalog 6.2 NO 44.20Challenger Middle School San Diego Unified 1,137 121 10.6 561 49.3 5.5 Tagalog 2.1 NO 75.63Clark Middle San Diego Unified 1,125 475 42.2 1125 100.0 31.4 NO 35.71Correia Middle San Diego Unified 874 100 11.4 432 49.4 16.5 YES 74.97De Portola Middle San Diego Unified 998 83 8.3 450 45.1 5.9 NO 72.44Gompers Charter San Diego Unified 886 342 38.6 886 100.0 42.2 YES 37.43High Tech Middle San Diego Unified 335 23 6.9 114 34.0 4.3 NO 69.07High Tech Middle Media Arts San Diego Unified 331 28 8.5 164 49.5 4.9 YES 75.00Innovation Middle School San Diego Unified 529 67 12.7 322 60.9 4.8 YES 63.52Kieller Leadership Academy San Diego Unified 403 96 23.8 403 100.0 22.5 NO 47.31KIPP Adelante San Diego Unified 366 189 51.6 366 100.0 43.1 NO 46.25Lewis Middle San Diego Unified 1,079 123 11.4 532 49.3 8.7 Vietnamese 2.2 NO 75.38Magnolia Science Academy San Diego San Diego Unified 308 15 4.9 64 20.8 3.3 NO 64.80Mann Middle San Diego Unified 827 366 44.3 827 100.0 27.2 Somali 4.5 Vietnamese 3 NO 45.14Marshall Middle School San Diego Unified 1,488 29 1.9 209 14.0 1.5 NO 86.71Marston Middle San Diego Unified 818 186 22.7 556 68.0 21.7 NO 57.36Memorial Scholars & Athletes School San Diego Unified 537 349 65.0 537 100.0 76.6 NO 22.90Millennial Tech Middle School San Diego Unified 516 41 7.9 384 74.4 11.3 YES 66.13


APPENDIX F: San Diego County Middle School DataData Source: California Department of Education DataQuest




Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language

in 2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language

in 2009

Made AYP

2010-2011

For English-

Language

Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011 California

Standards Test

English

Language Arts

Joan MacQuen Middle School Alpine Union 729 25 3.4 188 25.8 2.6 YES 75.87Norm Sullivan Middle School Bonsall Union 519 111 21.4 179 34.5 27.3 YES 71.19Borrego Springs Middle School Borrego Springs Unified 95 10 10.5 71 74.7 32.7 YES 48.40Cajon Valley Community Day School Cajon Valley Union 23 6 26.1 21 91.3 35.0 Kurdish 5.0 NO 0.00Cajon Valley Middle School Cajon Valley Union 804 300 37.3 649 80.7 24.5 NO 35.72Emerald Middle School Cajon Valley Union 723 327 45.2 596 82.4 18.2 Chaldean 9.2 Arabic 5.9 NO 37.07Greenfield Middle School Cajon Valley Union 693 137 19.8 471 68.0 12.4 NO 50.33Hillsdale Middle School Cajon Valley Union 1,485 90 6.1 375 25.3 2.6 NO 82.65Los Coches Creek Middle School Cajon Valley Union 814 37 4.5 289 35.5 2.7 NO 67.45Montgomery Middle School Cajon Valley Union 792 202 25.5 554 69.9 16.4 NO 45.03Aviara Oaks Middle School Carlsbad Unified 744 38 5.1 158 21.2 4.2 YES 80.68Calavera Hills Middle School Carlsbad Unified 561 34 6.1 146 26.0 6.3 YES 69.75Valley Middle School Carlsbad Unified 1007 62 6.2 310 30.8 9.0 NO 73.62Coronado Middle Coronado Unified 742 5 0.7 51 6.9 0.8 YES 85.02Bear Valley Middle Escondido Union 1146 195 17.0 591 51.6 17.0 NO 59.79Del Dios Middle Escondido Union 928 356 38.4 796 85.8 37.3 NO 42.29Hidden Valley Middle School Escondido Union 1275 417 32.7 994 78.0 33.4 NO 41.46Mission Middle School Escondido Union 982 422 43.0 932 94.9 48.4 NO 38.13Nicolaysen Community Day School Escondido Union 34 33 97.1 34 100.0 74.4 YES 15.00Rincon Middle School Escondido Union 1243 278 22.4 735 59.1 23.0 NO 55.41James E. Potter Intermediate School Fallbrook Union 887 223 25.1 530 59.8 24.9 NO 59.07Santa Margarita Academy School Fallbrook Union 6 5 83.3 1 16.7 66.7 YES N/AOak Grove Middle School Jamul-Dulzura Union 314 31 9.9 140 44.6 20.0 YES 65.54Julian Junior High School Julian Union 93 6 6.5 29 31.2 10.6 NO 62.48La Mesa Middle School La Mesa-Spring Valley 1029 105 10.2 549 53.4 10.4 NO 56.82La Presa Middle School La Mesa-Spring Valley 787 214 27.2 658 83.6 36.9 NO 46.67Parkway Middle School La Mesa-Spring Valley 1210 69 5.7 386 31.9 5.8 NO 69.13Quest Academy La Mesa-Spring Valley 19 7 36.8 2 10.5 23.1 NO 27.00Spring Valley Middle School La Mesa-Spring Valley 971 136 14.0 619 63.7 13.5 NO 55.89Lakeside Middle School Lakeside Union 638 39 6.1 210 32.9 5.2 NO 63.81River Valley Charter School Lakeside Union 252 4 1.6 3 1.2 0.0 YES 87.50Tierra del Sol Middle School Lakeside Union 500 30 6.0 195 39.0 4.8 NO 60.33





Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language

in 2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language

in 2009

Made AYP

2010-2011

For English-

Language

Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011 California

Standards Test

English

Language Arts

Montgomery Middle School San Diego Unified 446 173 38.8 446 100.0 31.0 Vietnamese 3.8 NO 43.05Muirlands Middle School San Diego Unified 1,058 110 10.4 315 29.8 9.0 NO 78.66O'Farrell Community Center San Diego Unified 946 212 22.4 668 70.6 16.0 Tagalog 3.5 NO 45.50Pacific Beach Middle School San Diego Unified 698 163 23.4 483 69.2 30.2 NO 50.29Pershing Middle School San Diego Unified 882 77 8.7 401 45.5 7.1 NO 74.01Preuss School UCSD San Diego Unified 816 27 3.3 235 28.8 3.6 YES 77.53Roosevelt International Middle School San Diego Unified 795 197 24.8 795 100.0 28.9 NO 56.01San Diego SCPA School San Diego Unified 1,417 92 6.5 749 52.9 6.4 NO 57.90Standley Middle School San Diego Unified 1,050 104 9.9 367 35.0 10.0 YES 78.23Taft Middle School San Diego Unified 625 107 17.1 457 73.1 14.5 NO 51.91Wangenheim Middle School San Diego Unified 1,095 151 13.8 551 50.3 5.3 Tagalog 3 NO 70.98Wilson Middle School San Diego Unified 570 278 48.8 570 100.0 41.2 Vietnamese 4.3 NO 30.77Diegueno Middle School San Dieguito Union 813 39 4.8 99 12.2 5.6 YES 81.88Oak Crest Middle School San Dieguito Union 884 72 8.1 171 19.3 10.9 YES 80.31Carmel Valley Middle School San Dieguito Union High 1,470 74 5.0 69 4.7 0.9 Korean 1.5 YES 91.52Earl Warren Middle School San Dieguito Union High 704 34 4.8 47 6.7 5.3 YES 85.00San Elijo Middle School San Marcos Unified 1439 54 3.8 238 16.5 4.2 YES 83.00San Marcos Middle School San Marcos Unified 1295 350 27.0 879 67.9 32.4 NO 58.28Woodland Park Middle School San Marcos Unified 1340 151 11.3 633 47.2 15.9 NO 77.00San Ysidro Middle School San Ysidro Elementary 894 348 38.9 651 72.8 56.5 NO 43.98Discovery Hills and Valley School SDCOE 46 4 8.7 13 28.3 11.5 YES N/AEast Region Community School SDCOE 266 68 25.6 230 86.5 19.4 NO N/AHope Region Community School SDCOE 66 30 45.5 66 100.0 32.0 YES N/ANorth Region Community School SDCOE 336 151 44.9 239 71.1 31.0 NO N/AMesa Region Court School SDCOEE 454 170 37.4 433 95.4 29.2 YES N/ABonita Vista Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 1,134 125 11.0 267 23.5 12.2 NO 63.57Castle Park Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 1,052 348 33.1 814 77.4 37.3 NO 48.49Chula Vista Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 1,191 269 22.6 885 74.3 28.1 NO 54.01Eastlake Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 1,602 141 8.8 344 21.5 10.3 NO 72.98Granger Junior High School Sweetwater Union HS 1,033 283 27.4 892 86.4 25.0 Tagalog 2.6 YES 59.51Hilltop Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 1,129 144 12.8 567 50.2 17.1 YES 67.87Mar Vista Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 1,061 256 24.1 763 71.9 29.1 NO 47.42




Enrollment

Total No.

ELL

Students

in School

% ELL in

School

Total No.

Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% Socio-

Economic

Disadvant.

Students at

School

% of

Students

Reporting

Spanish as

Primary

Language

2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language

in 2009

% of

Students

Reporting

Other

Language

in 2009

Made AYP

2010-2011

For English-

Language

Arts

% Proficient

and Above

2011 California

Standards Test

English

Language Arts

Montgomery Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 886 268 30.2 644 72.7 31.9 NO 51.10National City Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 731 228 31.2 680 93.0 36.4 YES 58.01Options Secondary School Sweetwater Union HS 282 44 15.6 130 46.1 18.3 NO 45.13Rancho del Rey Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 1,633 151 9.2 416 25.5 13.6 NO 71.51Southwest Middle School Sweetwater Union HS 635 250 39.4 507 79.8 46.3 YES 41.58Valley Center Middle School Valley Center 854 126 14.8 386 45.2 14.5 NO 64.52Madison Middle School Vista Unified 1271 104 8.2 540 42.5 9.7 NO 74.72Rancho Minerva Middle School Vista Unified 901 290 32.2 756 83.9 39.5 NO 47.00Roosevelt Middle School Vista Unified 1143 133 11.6 446 39.0 11.6 NO 68.82Vista Magnet Middle School Vista Unified 609 64 10.5 289 47.5 17.0 NO 74.32Washington Middle School Vista Unified 695 294 42.3 612 88.1 43.9 NO 40.71Warner Junior/Senior High School Warner Unified 110 10 9.1 92 83.6 9.7 YES 32.30




APPENDIX G: 2010 High School Cohort Dropout Rates by School in San Diego CountyAPPENDIX G 2010 HIGH SCHOOL COHORT DROPOUT RATES BY SCHOOL IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY

School Name District Cohort Dropout Rate '09-'10

Carlsbad High Carlsbad 2.9%Coronado High Coronado 5.4%Escondido High Escondido 5.2%Orange Glen High Escondido 3.9%San Pasqual High Escondido 5.2%Fallbrook High Fallbrook 7.5%El Cajon Valley High Grossmont 19.1%El Capitan High Grossmont 10.0%Granite Hills High Grossmont 10.8%Grossmont High Grossmont 7.0%Monte Vista High Grossmont 16.1%Mount Miguel High Grossmont 13.6%Santana High Grossmont 4.7%Steele Canyon High Grossmont 7.8%Valhalla High Grossmont 8.5%West Hills High Grossmont 6.1%Julian High Julian 0.0%Mountain Empire High Mountain Empire 9.3%El Camino High Oceanside 7.0%Oceanside High Oceanside 14.0%Mt. Carmel High Poway 1.9%Poway High Poway 1.1%Rancho Bernardo High Poway 1.6%Westview High Poway 0.3%Ramona High Ramona 5.9%Hoover High San Diego 19.1%Lincoln High San Diego 10.8%Morse High San Diego 12.8%Point Loma High San Diego 8.1%Clairemont High San Diego 5.5%Crawford CHAMPS San Diego 22.6%Crawford IDEA San Diego 23.8%Crawford Law and Business San Diego 26.8%Crawford Multimedia and Visual San Diego 22.8%Henry High San Diego 8.0%Kearny Construction Tech San Diego 2.9%Kearny Digital Media & Design San Diego 6.0%Kearny International Business San Diego 8.0%Kearny SCT San Diego 6.9%La Jolla High San Diego 5.1%Madison High San Diego 11.8%Mira Mesa High San Diego 4.7%Mission Bay High San Diego 18.8%San Diego Business San Diego 17.8%San Diego International Studie San Diego 4.2%

Excludes Academies, Charter, Continuation, and mixed Jr/Sr High Schools. All data were retrieved on or before 10/12/2011 from http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ and may not reflect later periodic adjustments made by the CDE.




APPENDIX G 2010 HIGH SCHOOL COHORT DROPOUT RATES BY SCHOOL IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY

School Name District Cohort Dropout Rate '09-'10

San Diego LEADS San Diego 13.2%San Diego Metro Career and Tec San Diego 0.0%San Diego MVP Arts San Diego 25.2%San Diego Science and Technolo San Diego 16.2%Scripps Ranch High San Diego 8.0%Serra High San Diego 10.8%University City High San Diego 2.7%La Costa Canyon High San Dieguito 2.8%Torrey Pines High San Dieguito 1.8%Foothills High San Marcos 16.7%Mission Hills High San Marcos 9.1%San Marcos High San Marcos 11.1%Twin Oaks High San Marcos 16.7%Bonita Vista Senior High Sweetwater 3.9%Castle Park Senior High Sweetwater 6.4%Chula Vista Senior High Sweetwater 10.4%Eastlake High Sweetwater 3.4%Hilltop Senior High Sweetwater 4.0%Mar Vista Senior High Sweetwater 7.6%Montgomery Senior High Sweetwater 10.1%Olympian High Sweetwater 5.3%Otay Ranch Senior High Sweetwater 4.2%Palomar High Sweetwater 9.1%San Ysidro High Sweetwater 11.0%Southwest Senior High Sweetwater 8.0%Sweetwater High Sweetwater 9.5%Oak Glen High Valley Center - Pauma 6.6%Valley Center High Valley Center - Pauma 4.8%Rancho Buena Vista High Vista 9.4%Vista High Vista 7.8%




1. Rumberger, Russell. “Ten-Year Trends in Califor-nia’s Dropout and Gradu-ation Rates.” University of California, Santa Barbara, Gevirtz Graduate School of Education (2009): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.cdrp.ucsb.edu>.

2. “Early Warning! Why Reading by the End of Third Grade Matters.” Annie E. Casey Foundation (2010): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.aecf.org/>.

3. Guillermo Montes and Christine Lehmann. “Who Will Drop Out From School? Key Predictors from Literature.” The Children’s Institute (2004): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.childrensinstitute.net>.

4. Jack Shonkoff and Deborah Philips. “From Neurons to Neighbor-hoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development.” National Research Council and Institute of Medicine (2000): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://iom.edu>.

5. National Center for Education Statistics: Web. 1 June 2011. <http://nces.ed.gov>.

6. Annie E. Casey Foundation, (2010): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.aecf.org/>.

7. “First 5 California Children and Families Commission Hard to Reach Populations Research Project.” First 5 California (2009): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.ccfc.ca.gov>.

8. Personal interview, YMCA Child care Resource Service, November, 2010.

9.“2010 San Diego County Child care Needs Assess-ment.” San Diego County Office of Education (2010): Web. 14 July 2011. <https://sdcoe.net/>.

10. “2009 The California Child Care Portfolio. ”California Child Care Resource and Referral Network (2010): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.rrnetwork.org>.

11. Arthur Reynolds, Judy Temple, Dylan Robertson, and Emily Mann. “Long-term Effects of an Early Childhood Intervention on Educational Achieve-ment and Juvenile Arrest.” Journal of American Medi-cal Association (2001): 285(18) 2339-2346. Print.

12. San Diego County YMCA Resource and Refer-ral: Web. 15 January 2011. <crs.ymca.org>.

13. “The Economic Impact of the Child Care Industry in San Diego County.” Report to the San Diego County Child Care and Development Planning Council (2005): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.sdcoe.net>.

14. “Early Warning! Why Reading by the End of Third Grade Matters.” Annie E. Casey Foundation (2010): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.aecf.org>.

15. California Department of Education: Web. 14 July 2011. <http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>

16. Education Data Partner-ship San Diego County Profile: Web. 15 July 2011. <http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us>.

17. California Department of Education: Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest> STAR Test Results English-Language Fluency

18. Education Data Partner-ship San Diego County Profile: Web. 15 July 2011. <http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us>.

19. California Department of Education: Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>.

20. Ibid.


22. For purposes of this report the term “middle school” refers to grades 6-8.

23. Russell Balfanz. “Putting Middle Grades Students on the Graduation Path.” National Middle School Association (2009): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.nmsa.org>.

24. Ibid.

25. Ibid.

26. Trish Williams, et al. “Gaining Ground in the Middle Grades: Why Some Schools Do Better.” EdSource (2010): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.edsource.org>.


28. Ibid.

29. G. Montes and C. Lehmann, C. “Who will drop out from school? Key predictors from the literature.” Children’s Institute Technical Report T04-001 (2004). Print.

30. Russel Rumberger. “Dropping out of Middle School: A Multilevel Analysis of Students and Schools.” American Educational Research Journal (1995): 31(3), 583-625. Print.

31. The California Dropout Research Project: Web. 1 June, 2011. <http://www.cdrp.ucsb.edu>.

32. It is important to note that dropout data is regu-larly questioned by school officials and education experts who believe that the data system for collect-ing dropout data is flawed. In 2008, the State of Cali-fornia instituted a system for tracking individual students (CALPADS) which is intended to improve accuracy; however, glitches in the system are still being addressed.

33. According to the California Department of Education, English Learner (EL) students (formerly known as Limited-English-Proficient or LEP) are those students for whom there is a report of a primary language other than Eng-lish on the state-approved Home Language Survey and who, on the basis of the state approved oral language (grades K-12) assessment procedures and including literacy (grades 3-12 only), have been determined to lack the clearly defined English language skills of listening comprehension, speak-ing, reading, and writing necessary to succeed in the school’s regular instruc-tional programs.

34. San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG): Web. 12 January 2011. <http://www.sandag.org>.

35. “2010 San Diego County Child care Needs Assessment.” San Diego County Office of Education (2010): Web. 14 July 2011. <https://sdcoe.net/>.



37. “Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8.” National Association for the Education of Young Children (2009): Web. 1 August 2011. <http://www.naeyc.org>.

38. “California Report Card 2011: Setting the Agenda for Children.” Children Now (2011): Web. 18 July 2011. <http://www.childrennow.org/uploads/documents/report-card_2011.pdf>.

39. Grecia Marrufo, Margaret O’Brien-Strain, and Helen Oliver. “Child Care Subsidies Have Raised Prices for All Families.” Public Policy Institute of California (2003): Web. 1 August 2011. <http://www.ppic.org>.

40. “California Report Card 2011: Setting the Agenda for Children.” Children Now (2011): Web. 18 July 2011. <http://www.childrennow.org/uploads/documents/report-card_2011.pdf>.

41. United Way Worldwide, Education Research Overview, 2011.

42. “Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8.” National Association for the Education of Young Children (2009): Web. 1 August 2011. <http://www.naeyc.org>.


44. Debbie Macdonald. Personal Interview. 8 Feb 2011.

45. “2010 San Diego County Child Care Needs Assessment with Projec-tions for 2015 and 2020.” San Diego County Child Care and Development Planning Council (2010): Web. 1 August 2011. <http://www.sdcoe.net>.

46. Title Five programs and Early Start are the two funding sources for infant care.

47. California Child Care Resources and Referral Network, 2010.

48. “CCDBG Income Eligi-bility by State.” National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies: Web. 11 August 2011. <http://www.naccrra.org/randd/ccdbg-tanf/in-come_eligibility_cutoffs>.

49. San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 August 2011. <http://www.sandag.org>.



52. “Summary of the Child Care and Development Fund State Plan for the Period of 10/01/09 through 9/30/11 for California.” California Department of Education. Web 1 August. <http://www.cde.ca.gov>.

53. Dan Bellm and Marcy Whitebook. “Compensa-tion and Comparable Worth: What Lies Ahead for California’s Preschool Teachers.” Center for the Study of Child Care Em-ployment (2004): Web 11 August. <http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/cscce/?s=compensation+and+comparable+worth>.

54. Indeed: Web. March 2011. <http://www.indeed.com>.

55. “2010 San Diego County Child care Needs Assess-ment.” San Diego County Office of Education (2010): Web. 14 July 2011. <https://sdcoe.net/>.

56. “Issue Brief: School Readiness.” United Way Worldwide Education (2011).

57. Marielle Bohan-Baker and Priscilla Little. “The Transition to Kindergar-ten: A Review of Current Research and Promis-ing Practices to Involve Families.” Harvard Family Research Project (2011): Web. 18 July 2011. <http://www.hfrp.org>.

58. “Transitional Kinder-garten: Getting Kids Ready for Success in School.” Preschool California (2008): Web. 1 Aug 2011. <http://www.ppic.org>.

59. California Senate Bill (SB) 1381 amended the California Education Code to change the required birthday for admission to kindergarten and first grade. This bill has been called the “Kindergarten Readiness Act of 2010.”

60. “Education Research Overview.” United Way Worldwide (2011): Web. 14 July 2011. www.worldwide.unitedway.org>.

61. “Research Brief: The

Costs and Benefits of Universal Preschool in Cali-fornia.” Rand Corporation (2005): Web. 18 July 2011. <http://www.rand.org>.

62. “The Economic Impact of the Child Care Industry in San Diego County.” Report to the San Diego County Child Care and Develop-ment Planning Council (2005): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.sdcoe.net>.


64. Ibid.

65. Ibid.

66. Ibid.

67. Ibid.

68. Ibid.

69. A score of Basic indicates that a student is demonstrating some awareness, but not competency, of the subject matter at that grade level.

70. Excludes charter schools and continuation schools. Detailed data for each school are available in Appendix E.

71. Ed-Data Education Data Partnership: Web. 1 August 2011. <http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us>

72. For a more thorough de-scription of both NAEP and STAR exams see the follow-ing: http://toped.svefoun-dation.org/2010/08/30/why-are-star-cst-and-naep-important/

73. For purposes of this report the term middle school refers to grades 6-8.


74. “Seizing the Middle Ground: Why Middle School Creates the Path-way to College and the Workforce.” United Way Los Angeles (2008): Web. 18 July 2011. <http://www. unitedwayla.org>.

75. “Improving Education for the Common Good: United Way’s Education Action Plan.” United Way (2009): Web. 18 July. <http://www.makinggradu-ationpossible.org/UWAc-tionPlan.pdf>.

76. Robert Balfanz. “Putting Middle Grades Students on the Gradua-tion Path.” National Middle School Association (2009): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.nmsa.org>.

77. Trish Williams, et al. “Gaining Ground in the Middle Grades: Why Some Schools Do Better.” EdSource (2010): Web. 14 July 2011. <http://www.edsource.org>.

78. California Department of Education: DataQuest Web. 24 September 2011. <http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/dataquest.asp>.

79. National Association for Education and Statis-tics: Web August 3 2011. <http://nces.ed.gov>

80. Robert Balfanz, Lisa Herzog, and Douglas J. Mac Iver. “Preventing Disen-gagement and Keeping Students on the Graduation Path in Urban Middle-Grades Schools: Early Identification and Effective Interventions.” Education Psychologist 42.4 (2007): 223-235. Web. 18 July 2011. <http://www.every1gradu-ates.org>.

81. Ibid.

82. Bridget Hamre and Robert Pianta. “Early Teacher-Child Relationships and the Trajectory of Chil-dren’s School Outcomes through Eighth Grade.” Child Development 72.2 (2001): 625-638.

83. California Department of Education: DataQuest Web. 1 August 2011. <http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/dataquest.asp>.

84. Excludes charter schools. Detailed data for each school are available in Appendix F.

85. In this report middle school is defined as students in grade 6-8.

86. Louise Kennelly and Maggie Monrad. “Approaches to Dropout Prevention: Heeding Early Warning Signs with Appropriate Interven-tions.” National High School Center at the American Institutes for Research (2007): Web. 11 August 2011. <http://www.betterhighschools.org/docs/NHSC_Approachesto-DropoutPrevention.pdf>.

87. For a more thorough description of both NAEP and STAR exams see http://toped.svefounda-tion.org/2010/08/30/why-are-star-cst-and-naep-important/

88. Russell Rumberger. “Dropping out of Middle School: A Multilevel Analysis of Students and Schools.” American Edu-cational Research Journal (1995): 31(3), 583-625. Print.

89. Clive Belfield and Henry Levin. “The Economic Losses from High School Dropouts in California.” California Dropout Re-search Project (2007): Web. 11 August 2011. <http://www.cdrp.ucsb.edu>.

90. “High School Dropouts and the Economic Losses from Juvenile Crime in Cali-fornia” California Dropout Research Project (2009): Web. 18 July 2011. <http://cdrp.ucsb.edu>.


92. According to the California Department of Education, English Learner (EL) students (formerly known as Limited-English-Proficient or LEP): English Leaner students are those students for whom there is a report of a primary language other than Eng-lish on the state-approved Home Language Survey and who, on the basis of the state approved oral language (grades K-12) assessment procedures and including literacy (grades 3-12 only), have been determined to lack the clearly defined English language skills of listening comprehension, speak-ing, reading, and writing necessary to succeed in the school’s regular instruc-tional programs.

93. California Department of Education Educational Demographics Unit: Web. 11 August 2011. <http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/>.

94. It is important to note that dropout data is regu-larly questioned by school officials and education experts who believe that the system for collecting dropout data is flawed. In 2008, the State of Cali-fornia instituted a system for tracking individual students (CALPADS) which is intended to improve accuracy; however, glitches in the system are still being addressed. See: Russell Rumberger. “Ten-Year Trends in California’s Dropout and Gradua-tion Rates.” University of California, Santa Barbara, Gevirtz Graduate School of Education (2009): Web. 14 July 2011. < http://www.cdrp.ucsb.edu>.

95. The adjusted four-year derived dropout rate estimates the percentage of students who are likely to drop out over a four-year period from grades 9-12. See: Russell Rumberger and Lauren Taylor. “A More Accurate Measure of California’s Dropout Rate.” University of California,

Santa Barbara, Gevirtz Graduate School of Educa-tion (2010): Web. 11 August 2011. < http://www.cdrp.ucsb.edu>.

96. California Department of Education Educational Demographics Unit: Web. 11 August 2011. <http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/>.

97. San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

98. “2050 Regional Growth Forecast, Major Statistical Area 4 - North County West; Population by Age, Popula-tion by Race and Ethnicity.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

99. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 4 - North County West; Lan-guage Spoken at Home and Ability to Speak English.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.


101. Ed-Data Education Data Partnership: Web. 1 July 2011. <http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us>.

102. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 4 - North County West; Educational Attainment.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

103. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 4 - North County West; Poverty Status.” San Diego Associa-tion of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

104. “2050 Regional Growth Forecast, Major Statistical Area 5 - North County East; Population by Age, Population by Race and Ethnicity.” San Diego Association of Govern-ments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.


105. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 5 - North County East; Lan-guage Spoken at Home and Ability to Speak English.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.



108. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 5 - North County East; Educational Attainment.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

109. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 5 - North County East; Poverty Status.” San Diego Associa-tion of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

110. “2050 Regional Growth Forecast, Major Statistical Area 1- North City; Popula-tion by Age, Population by Race and Ethnicity.” San Diego Association of Gov-ernments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

111. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 1 - North City; Language Spoken at Home and Ability to Speak English.” San Diego Association of Gov-ernments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.



114. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 1 - North City; Educational Attainment.” San Diego As-sociation of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

115. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 1 - North City; Poverty Status.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

116.”2050 Regional Growth Forecast, Major Statistical Area 0 - Central; Population by Age, Population by Race and Ethnicity.” San Diego Association of Govern-ments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

117. Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 0 - Central; Language Spoken at Home and Ability to Speak English.” San Diego Association of Govern-ments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.



120. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 0 - Central; Educational Attainment.” San Diego Association of Govern-ments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

121. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 0 - Central; Poverty Status.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

122. “2050 Regional Growth Forecast, Major Statistical Area 6 – East County; Population by Age, Population by Race and Ethnicity.” San Diego As-sociation of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

123. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 6 – East County; Language Spoken at Home and Ability to Speak English.” San Diego Association of Gov-ernments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.



126. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 6 – East County; Educational Attainment.” San Diego As-sociation of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

127. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 6 – East County; Poverty Sta-tus.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

128.”2050 Regional Growth Forecast, Major Statistical Area 3 – East Suburban; Population by Age, Popula-tion by Race and Ethnicity.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

129. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 3 – East Suburban; Language Spoken at Home and Ability to Speak English.” San Diego Association of Gov-ernments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.



132. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 3 - East Suburban; Educational Attainment.” San Diego As-sociation of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

133. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 3 – East Suburban; Poverty Sta-tus.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

134. “2050 Regional Growth Forecast, Major Statistical Area 2 – South Suburban; Population by Age, Population by Race and Ethnicity.” San Diego Association of Govern-ments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

135. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 2 – South Suburban; Language Spoken at Home and Ability to Speak English.” San Diego Association of Gov-ernments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.



138. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 2 – South Suburban; Educational Attainment.” San Diego Association of Governments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

139. “Census 2000 Profile, Major Statistical Area 2 – South Suburban; Poverty Status.” San Diego Association of Govern-ments: Web. 1 July 2011. <www.sandag.org>.

140. Community Care Licensing under Title XXII

141. There are similar scales for infant care and school-aged care.


CONCLUSIONOne of the strongest roles United Way plays in making real community change is that of a mobilizing force, recruiting people with passion, expertise and resources to make a difference. In the area of Education, United Way of San Diego County is beginning to shape the commu-nity conversation, convene stakeholders to examine issues, develop strategies and execute action plans on issues that matter most.

After reviewing the local research on this topic several key facts stand out:

n Parental engagement is critical to help ensure students’ academic success.

Increased parental engagement results in children with larger vocabularies, who are better readers, and who perform better in school.


Every dollar spent on preschool generates more than a $7 savings by reducing the amount of government spending on welfare, criminal justice and education.

n There is a significant achievement gap between ethnic groups.

Only 57% of all Hispanic and Latino, and 58% of African American fourth- grade students in San Diego County are reading proficiently at the fourth-grade level compared to nearly 85% of White and Asian fourth graders.


n Students classified as English Language Learners (ELL) and economically disadvantaged score lower in English Language Arts than the total student population.

Achievement gaps appear to widen for ELLs in the upper elementary grades so that by fifth grade ELLS are by far the most under-performing subgroup of students on the California Standards Test exam for English Language Arts.

n There is little change in student achievement trends from elementary to middle school.

36% of San Diego County eighth-grade students were not proficient in English Language Arts.

n Students who are classified as English Learners are more likely to drop out of high school.

The cohort dropout rate in San Diego County is 27% for these students as compared with 15.9% for the entire student population. Looking at the big picture – from cradle to career – the data suggest that there are four key strategies that must be in place to ensure that all children are afforded the educational opportunities they deserve.

1. Engage students in learning while in school.

Experts say that engaging our children – meeting them where they are, having high expectations and challenging them – is critical.

2. Support families to improve academic achievement.

Research shows that when families are actively involved in their child’s learning, it improves that child’s attendance, social skills, grades, and chances of staying in school. This is true for younger children as well as for middle and high school students.

3. Connect students with the resources they need outside of school.

Only 20% of a student’s waking hours are spent in school, so out-of-school-time learning is a key part of the suc-cess equation. Children learn in every aspect of their life – from the minute they are born – so a community web of social, cultural, educational, and economic resources should be in place (and sustained) to encourage learning.

4. Build stronger systems to support children and youth.

Fragmented community systems – such as schools, health care, human service, and juvenile justice systems – deal with children and families from one particular perspective. Too often, those efforts are not connected. Research shows that when leaders of schools, health care, family support, youth development, child welfare, justice, and other systems find ways to work together to support student success, children and youth benefit from higher quality, more coordinated services.

These strategies are supported by the local research outlined in this report, input from our donors, and the community feedback highlighted in our recently published report, Voices for the Common Good: San Diego Speaks Out On Education. The action strategies presented go beyond what United Way of San Diego County might do. This is by design. We want to lay out the bigger picture of what needs to be done in conjunction with the broader community.

Which strategies United Way of San Diego County should hone in on – and how, with whom – depends on our community’s vision, its current challenges, and its resources, both human and financial. The identification and implementation of the specific United Way strategies will become the work of the Education Vision Council.


NEED MORE INFORMATION?Please contact:

CJ Robinson

Community Impact Manager


P: 858.636.4153

E: [email protected]

VOLUNTEER CHALLENGE

Education Volunteer Call to ActionLearn about the United Way education Volunteer Call to Action to recruit 10,000 local volunteer readers, tutors and mentors.

www.uwsd.org


LIVE UNITED®

GIVE. ADVOCATE. VOLUNTEER.Photo: Michael Spengler, Studio M La Jolla


4699 Murphy Canyon Road San Diego, CA 92123www.uwsd.org

United Way of San Diego County© 2012 United Way of San Diego County

san diego education research overview

Documents

school readiness

high school graduation

research findings

middle school success

san diego students

time high school completion

parts of san diego county

philanthropic research