Is this your district? Email the board to prioritize reading!
Email BoardJefferson Union High
San Mateo County school performance
Jefferson Union High is underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 62nd percentile among California school districts.
55.6% of students met California's reading standard, but it is trending down slightly.
Math is weaker: 32.1% of students met California's math standard, but it is trending up slightly.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 55.6% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 32.1% |
| District Reading Rank | 273 / 977 (72nd percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 479 / 977 (51st percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 20:1 |
| Spend per Student | $23,687 |
| Schools in District | 6 |
| Student Enrollment | 4,108 |
| Low-Income Students | 1,230 (33.1%) |
| English Learners | 573 (15.4%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading fell 1.8 points from last year and fell 1.4 points over the full period. Math fell 0.6 points from last year and rose 1.8 points over the full period.
•Math +1.8 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Sherrett Walker Board Trustee, President [email protected] | N/A | 2026This year! |
Rosie Tejada Board Trustee, Vice President [email protected] | N/A | 2026This year! |
Andrew "Andy" Lie Board Trustee, Clerk [email protected] | N/A | 2028 |
Jerome Gallegos Board Trustee [email protected] | N/A | 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 22.4 points in reading. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
9.4% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 63.3% of English-only students. The gap widened as English-learner results rose 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 22.9 points in math. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
8.7% of English learners meet the math standard, compared with 40.6% 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 Jefferson Union High rank in California?
Jefferson Union High ranks No. 273 of 977 in reading and No. 479 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Jefferson Union High’s schools?
Among the 6 schools serving 9–12, proficiency ranges from 9.8% to 64.3% in reading and 10.0% to 43.5% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Jefferson Union High’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 2 of 6 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 4 of 6.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Jefferson Union High compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 40.9%, compared with 45.3% at a typical California high district. In math, it is 17.1%, compared with 19.5%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Jefferson Union High?
High districts in San Mateo County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Jefferson Union HighThis district | 32.1% | 55.6% |
| San Mateo Union High | 50.9% | 69.2% |
| Sequoia Union High | 51.3% | 68.1% |
How we compare low-income results
“Typical” is the median across 74 California high 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.
