Alpine Union Elementary
San Diego County school performance
Alpine Union Elementary is underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 59th percentile among California school districts.
Only 44.4% of students met California's reading standard, but it is holding steady.
Math is weaker: 41.6% of students met California's math standard, but it is slowly trending up.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 44.4% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 41.6% |
| District Reading Rank | 501 / 977 (49th percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 301 / 977 (69th percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 20:1 |
| Spend per Student | $16,575 |
| Schools in District | 4 |
| Student Enrollment | 1,440 |
| Low-Income Students | 523 (36.3%) |
| English Learners | 67 (4.6%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading fell 3.7 points from last year and was unchanged over the full period. Math fell 0.6 points from last year and rose 4.1 points over the full period.
•Math +4.1 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Alpine Union School District ALPINE UNION SCHOOL DISTRICTBOARD OF TRUSTEESBOARD MEETING AGENDAS AND MINUTES | N/A | N/A |
Dickie Board Member | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Employment Opportunities ALPINE UNION SCHOOL DISTRICTBOARD OF TRUSTEESBOARD MEETING AGENDAS AND MINUTES | N/A | N/A |
Erika Simmons Board Member | 2024 | 2028 |
Guerra Board Member | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Search Site ALPINE UNION SCHOOL DISTRICTBOARD OF TRUSTEESBOARD MEETING AGENDAS AND MINUTES | N/A | N/A |
Travis Lyon Board Member | 2024 | 2028 |
Wray Board Member | 2022 | 2026This year! |
Expand for details on low-income and english learner performance
Reading Proficiency Scores
Comparison of low-income and English learner groups using district-level CAASPP proficiency data.
Low-Income vs Non-Low-Income
Low-income students trail other students by 20.3 points in reading. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
3.1% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 45.6% of English-only students. The gap widened as English-learner results fell and English-only results rose.
•Math Proficiency Scores
Comparison of low-income and English learner groups using district-level CAASPP proficiency data.
Low-Income vs Non-Low-Income
Low-income students trail other students by 15.7 points in math. It widened slightly over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
15.6% of English learners meet the math standard, compared with 42.4% of English-only students. The gap narrowed as English-learner results rose and English-only results rose.
•District School Map
Schools in this district, color-coded by reading proficiency.
Loading district map...
Hover over a school marker to see details
Schools
Understanding this district
How does Alpine Union Elementary rank in California?
Alpine Union Elementary ranks No. 501 of 977 in reading and No. 301 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
Are results improving across Alpine Union Elementary’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 2 of 4 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 3 of 4.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Alpine Union Elementary compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 30.4%, compared with 37.6% at a typical California elementary district. In math, it is 30.8%, compared with 28.2%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Alpine Union Elementary?
Elementary districts in San Diego County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Alpine Union ElementaryThis district | 41.6% | 44.4% |
| Julian Union Elementary | 42.9% | 41.6% |
| Jamul-Dulzura Union Elementary | 20.9% | 33.5% |
How we compare low-income results
“Typical” is the median across 444 California elementary districts with 2026 results, a reported low-income population, and at least 20 low-income tested students in each subject. Each district counts once. This compares proficiency for low-income students, rather than the gap between income groups.
