Is this your district? Email the board to prioritize reading!
Email BoardVictor Elementary
San Bernardino County school performance
Victor Elementary is badly underperforming.
Reading and math results average to the 27th percentile among California school districts.
Only 32.9% of students met California's reading standard, but it is slowly trending up.
Math is weaker: 23.6% of students met California's math standard, but it is trending up slightly.
| Current Reading Proficiency | 32.9% |
| Current Math Proficiency | 23.6% |
| District Reading Rank | 758 / 977 (22nd percentile) |
| District Math Rank | 672 / 977 (31st percentile) |
| Student / Teacher Ratio | 24:1 |
| Spend per Student | $20,412 |
| Schools in District | 18 |
| Student Enrollment | 12,303 |
| Low-Income Students | 10,205 (86.0%) |
| English Learners | 1,755 (14.8%) |
District Website
Great Schools
Niche
Ed-Data
CAASPPTest score trends
Reading rose 0.8 points from last year and rose 3.3 points over the full period. Math rose 0.6 points from last year and rose 2.1 points over the full period.
•Math +2.1 percentage pointsBoard Members
| name | elected | up for re-election |
|---|---|---|
Allen Williams President, Board of Trustees [email protected] | N/A | N/A |
Dr. Gary Elder Vice President, Board of Trustees [email protected] | N/A | N/A |
Clayton Moore Clerk, Board of Trustees [email protected] | N/A | N/A |
Dr. Gabriel Luis Stine Trustee, Board of Trustees [email protected] | N/A | N/A |
Sue Brannon Trustee, Board of Trustees [email protected] | N/A | N/A |
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 24.1 points in reading. It widened over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
14.1% of English learners meet the reading standard, compared with 33.1% 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 22.1 points in math. It narrowed slightly over the period shown.
•English Learners vs English Native
English-learner math proficiency held steady at 10.2%, while English-only results rose. The gap widened.
District School Map
Schools in this district, color-coded by reading proficiency.
Loading district map...
Hover over a school marker to see details
Schools
-1.3%Understanding this district
How does Victor Elementary rank in California?
Victor Elementary ranks No. 758 of 977 in reading and No. 672 of 977 in math for 2026. These proficiency rankings compare districts across all district types.
How much do results vary between Victor Elementary’s schools?
Among the 18 schools serving K–6, proficiency ranges from 16.0% to 71.5% in reading and 6.2% to 69.9% in math.
See the district’s schoolsAre results improving across Victor Elementary’s schools?
Over 2024–2026, reading proficiency rose at 13 of 18 schools with results covering that full period; math rose at 14 of 18.
Compare school trendsHow do low-income students in Victor Elementary compare with other districts?
Low-income reading proficiency is 29.2%, compared with 37.6% at a typical California elementary district. In math, it is 20.2%, compared with 28.2%.
See student-group resultsWhich districts should I compare with Victor Elementary?
Elementary districts in San Bernardino County. Peers have the closest enrollment sizes.
| District | Math | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| Victor ElementaryThis district | 23.6% | 32.9% |
| Etiwanda Elementary | 60.9% | 68.9% |
| Ontario-Montclair | 36.7% | 46.2% |
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.
