Steven Philley
Local Education Pruneyard Compton–Campbell Earthquakes Liquefaction Site contents

Local desk · Education literacy

South Bay education quality — Campbell Union first, then the county

Educational essay · Cited public sources · Not a school ranking · Updated Sep 2026

Start with the district that sits under Campbell’s elementary and middle schools. Then ask what “quality” has meant on California’s scoreboards for about twenty-five years. Then widen to Santa Clara County. The useful story is not a league table. It is how the yardsticks changed, what the published numbers actually say, and why averages in a rich valley still hide large gaps.

Campbell Union ESD — who they serve

This page is about Campbell Union School District — often written Campbell Union ESD or CUSD — a K–8 elementary district in Santa Clara County. The California Department of Education school-profile page lists CDS code 43 69393 0000000, address 155 North Third Street, Campbell, grade span elementary, and superintendent Dr. Shelly Viramontez. Ed-Data repeats the same CDS (43-69393-0000000) and calls it an elementary school district, grades K–8.

Not the high-school district. Campbell Union High School District is a different LEA (CDS 43-69401). It runs the comprehensive high schools that many CUSD graduates later attend. Scores, enrollment, and dashboards on this page are for the K–8 district unless a sentence says otherwise.

The district’s own 2024–25 Local Control and Accountability Plan is the cleanest current self-description: twelve schools serving students from Campbell, San Jose, Santa Clara, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga — eight TK–5 schools, a TK–8 Spanish/English dual-language school, a TK–8 design-thinking school, and two grades 6–8 middle schools. That is a western Santa Clara Valley elementary–middle footprint, not a city-limits-only system.

Enrollment — smaller than a generation ago

There is no single published “25-year official table” on one CDE web page that this essay could copy without assembling files. The best continuous public series is the federal Common Core of Data (CCD) for NCES LEAID 0607200 (state ID 4369393), plus the current CDE / Ed-Data headcount. Those sources do not invent a smooth curve. They do show decline after a mid-2010s plateau.

Enrollment is a fall membership count. CCD years are school-year starting years (2000 = 2000–01). Sources: NCES CCD directory via the Urban Institute Education Data Portal; CDE / Ed-Data for 2025–26; district LCAP for the March 2024 snapshot that matches CCD 2023.
YearStudentsSource
2000–017,793NCES CCD
2005–067,352NCES CCD
2010–117,555NCES CCD
2011–127,607CUSD LEA Plan (K–8)
2015–167,600NCES CCD
2017–187,298CUSD Citizens Oversight Committee
2019–206,974NCES CCD
2022–236,253NCES CCD
2023–246,183NCES CCD / LCAP (March 2024)
2024–256,120NCES CCD district detail
2025–266,051CDE profile / Ed-Data

From about 7,800 students at the start of the 2000s to about 6,050 in 2025–26 is a loss of roughly one student in five. The 2024–25 LCAP says the quiet part in administrative prose: the district is “continuing to experience declining enrollment.” That is a valley pattern as much as a campus story — housing cost, fewer school-age children in some neighborhoods, and families moving.

Who is in the seats

Demography moved while headcount fell. The May 2012 LEA Plan (Program Improvement Year 3) described a district that was still growing: 45.8% Hispanic/Latino, 31.2% White, 11.9% Asian, 4.9% African American, 2.7% Filipino; 43.3% English learners, 45% free or reduced-price lunch, 44.2% socioeconomically disadvantaged. The 2018–19 LCAP still said “more than 7,500” students: 47% Hispanic/Latino, 25% White, 15% Asian, 5% African American; 31% English learners; 43% free or reduced lunch.

By March 2024 the 2024–25 LCAP counted 6,183 students: 47% Hispanic, 21% White, 17% Asian or Pacific Islander, 4% Black/African American, and 11% not reported or mixed; 29% English learners, 42% free or reduced lunch, 12% with an IEP. The CDE 2025–26 profile puts English learners at 1,755 of 6,051 — 29.0%. CCD English-learner counts for earlier years are lumpy (1,761 in 2000–01; 2,523 in 2005–06; 2,403 in 2015–16; 1,812 in 2019–20) and should be read as federal reports, not as a perfect local census. The durable local sentence is simpler: Hispanic students have been about half the district for more than a decade; the White share fell; the Asian share rose; the English-learner share is lower than in the early 2010s but still near three in ten.

Those averages are not evenly spread. The same 2024–25 LCAP describes Rosemary School (396 students as of May 2024 DataZone): 84% Hispanic, 64.9% English learners, 85.1% socioeconomically disadvantaged. A district can be “diverse” on a pie chart and still be a set of very different schools.

How “quality” was measured

California did not keep one yardstick from 2000 to 2025. If a headline compares an API from 2005 to a CAASPP percentage from 2024, the comparison is broken. This page uses three eras on purpose.

  1. ~1998–2013 · STAR / API

    A 200-to-1000 index

    The Standardized Testing and Reporting program and the Academic Performance Index (API) were the public language of school quality in the 2000s. API condensed California Standards Tests and related exams into a 200–1000 scale. The statewide target was 800. Base and growth scores ran on a two-year cycle. Districts received API figures to satisfy federal No Child Left Behind rules. Ed-Data’s explainer is the calm vocabulary sheet.

  2. 2014– · Common Core / CAASPP

    Met or exceeded

    California adopted Common Core and replaced STAR with the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress. The Smarter Balanced exams in English language arts and mathematics (grades 3–8 and 11) report four achievement levels. “Met or exceeded” (levels 3 and 4) became the newspaper percentage. First operational year: 2014–15. The 2013 API reporting cycle was the last complete API era; CDE did not keep issuing a successor API on the old CST machine.

  3. 2017– · Dashboard + COVID gap

    Colors, then a hole in the film

    The California School Dashboard added status-and-change colors (and, for academics, distance from standard) on top of CAASPP. It is an accountability snapshot, not a second test. Spring 2020 statewide tests were not administered. 2020–21 testing was optional, with low and uneven participation; CDE has said those results should not be treated as a normal year-to-year comparison. Regular CAASPP reporting resumes in the 2021–22 files.

A fourth, research yardstick sits outside Sacramento’s scoreboard: the Stanford Education Data Archive (SEDA) on edopportunity.org. SEDA puts state tests onto a common grade-level scale relative to the 2019 national average. It is useful for long trends and subgroup gaps. It is still not a “quality of the school building” grade — average scores mix what happens in class with what students bring from home.

No continuous 25-year series. This essay will not stitch API points onto CAASPP percentages or pretend SEDA grade-level units are the same thing as “percent met or exceeded.” The honest read is segmented: API-era movement, then the CAASPP climb to 2019, then the post-2020 recovery that never quite returned to the 2019 peak.

Widen to the South Bay

Santa Clara County’s public averages sit above the state’s. They do not dissolve the gap.

The Santa Clara County Office of Education, reporting spring 2023 CAASPP (release 19 October 2023), said 59% of county students met or exceeded in ELA and 51% in math, against statewide figures of 47% and 35% — twelve and seventeen points higher. English learners in the county met or exceeded at 15% in ELA. SCCOE’s own sentence on the rest of the cut: students identified as Asian, White, or Two or More Races (or as not English learners, not socioeconomically disadvantaged, or not students with disabilities) “continue to experience rates significantly above the countywide average.” The release did not publish a Latino percentage in that paragraph. This page will not invent one.

On 14 November 2025 SCCOE summarized the 2025 Dashboard: county students at 59.8% ELA, 53.2% math, 47.6% science versus statewide 48.8%, 37.3%, and 32.7%. Chronic absenteeism 15.3% in the county versus 19.4% in the state. The county still outperforms the state. The 2023 gap language still applies: the average is not the distribution.

A separate county literacy cut — third-grade ELA — appears in San José State University’s Human Rights Institute Silicon Valley Pain Index 2024: 69% of White students, 79% of Asian students, 41% of Pacific Islander students, 38% of African American students, and 29% of Latinx students in Santa Clara County meeting or exceeding the third-grade English standard. That is not a Campbell Union figure. It is the South Bay pattern in one grade that predicts later reading trouble if it does not move.

Statewide, CDE’s 8 October 2025 assessment release put 2024–25 CAASPP at 48.8% ELA and 37.3% math (up from 47.0% and 35.5% in 2023–24). Hispanic/Latino students statewide: 38.8% ELA and 25.7% math in 2024–25, up from 36.8% and 23.7%. Those are California numbers. They explain why a county that beats the state can still have a large Latino gap: the state floor is low, and the valley’s Asian and White scores pull the county mean up.

Campbell Union’s own 2022–23 all-student rates (53% ELA, 45% math in the LCAP rounding; 53.3% and 44.8% on the dashboard) sit below the 2023 county averages SCCOE published (59% / 51%) and nearer the state. That is what a mixed K–8 district in a high-scoring county looks like when it is not Cupertino or Los Altos. It is not a ranking of towns. It is a reminder that “South Bay schools are strong” is an average with a long tail.

Context the tests do not score

Test trends are a literacy. They are not the whole child, and they are not the housing market. A few neighboring facts belong next to the tables.

Housing and the tech wage split. Joint Venture Silicon Valley’s October 2024 affordability brief, using California Association of Realtors September 2024 statistics, put the median existing single-family sale at about $1.9 million in Santa Clara County — more than double the statewide median ($868,100) and more than four times the U.S. median ($416,700). Estimated first-time-buyer affordability in the county: 25% in Q2 2024, down 17 points over a decade. Hispanic/Latino households able to afford a median-priced single-family home: 8% in Santa Clara County. The 2025 Silicon Valley Index adds the income sentence: White residents’ per capita income about $157,000 versus about $37,000 for Hispanic or Latino residents; average multifamily rent $3,210; nearly half of Silicon Valley renters spending more than 30% of income on rent. Families who can buy time — tutoring, summer programs, stable address — show up in test averages. Families who cannot show up in FRPM counts and in the SEDA “poor” line.

English learners and LCFF. California’s 2013 Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) replaced most categorical silos with a base grant plus extra dollars for “unduplicated” pupils — English learners, low-income students, foster youth — and required an LCAP. Campbell Union’s plans are the local paper trail of that era: dual-language and design-thinking programs, TK expansion, reading specialists, EL progress as a Red dashboard indicator, newcomer influx noted in 2023–24. The English-learner share fell from the low-40s in the 2012 LEA Plan to 29% in 2025–26, which can mean reclassification, demographic change, or both. It does not mean the remaining English learners closed the CAASPP gap (10–11% met or exceeded in the 2022–23 LCAP cut).

Pandemic loss and recovery. The missing 2020 tests are a hole, not a zero. National and California research (SEDA; CDE’s own 2021 caveat) treat 2020–21 as disruption: remote instruction, uneven participation, later chronic absenteeism. Campbell Union’s official CAASPP line is the local version — 2019 peak, 2022 drop especially in math, then a flat-to-soft ELA and a slow math crawl. SEDA’s learning-rate rank (19th percentile) and −0.10 grade-level-per-year trend since 2022 say recovery is not the same as “back.” Literacy here means: learning loss was real, recovery is uneven, and the groups who were behind in 2012 were still the Red groups on the 2023 Dashboard.

What scores leave out. Arts, climate, counselors, preschool access, a dual-language pathway, whether a child is housed — none of that is a Smarter Balanced achievement level. The LCAP spends pages on those things because the state asked districts to. This essay does not convert them into a second ranking.

Not a shopping list of schools. Nothing here says which campus a parent should choose, which teacher is effective, or that a high CAASPP rate equals a good childhood. GreatSchools-style ranks collapse a district like this into one number and hide Rosemary and Forest Hill in the same average. If you need a school decision, use current School Accountability Report Cards, a visit, and the people who actually teach there.

Sources

Disclaimer. Educational literacy only. Not a ranking of schools, not advice about where to enroll a child, and not an evaluation of any teacher, principal, or board. Test scores are incomplete measures of quality. API, CAASPP, Dashboard colors, and SEDA grade-level units are different instruments; they are not interchangeable. 2020 had no statewide CAASPP; 2021 was optional and is omitted here. Enrollment and demographic figures come from the named public files — they were not estimated. Campbell Union School District (K–8, CDS 43-69393) is not Campbell Union High School District (CDS 43-69401). Official CDE, CAASPP, Dashboard, and district LCAP pages beat any essay if the numbers later revise.