Laurelhurst lion, back to the home page

Save Strong K-8s

Successful neighborhood K-8s are worth more than just their price per student.

How do K-8 middle graders do on state tests?

Four of the seven K-8s PPS would convert to K-5s score at or above the PPS average overall, and above it for most of the student groups the state reports.

Among the neighborhood K-8s, Laurelhurst stands out. Its students outscore the PPS average in every reported group, for both math and reading. Moreover, the gaps in reading are widest for the students an equity plan should care most about reaching: +37 points for Hispanic/Latino students and +23 for students in poverty.

Share of students meeting state standards, grades 3–8, 2024-25 Oregon Department of Education, Oregon Statewide Assessment results 2024-25 ↗
  • All students 480 tested at Laurelhurst Reading (ELA) Laurelhurst79.3% Beverly Cleary78.3% Sunnyside60.8% Vernon56.1% PPS56.8% Math Laurelhurst68.7% Beverly Cleary70.9% Sunnyside52.9% Vernon53.5% PPS49.9%
  • White students 356 tested at Laurelhurst Reading (ELA) Laurelhurst82.0% Beverly Cleary84.2% Sunnyside66.0% Vernon72.1% PPS71.4% Math Laurelhurst72.3% Beverly Cleary78.2% Sunnyside58.8% Vernon71.7% PPS63.8%
  • Multiracial students 64 tested at Laurelhurst Reading (ELA) Laurelhurst81.3% Beverly Cleary79.6% Sunnyside56.8% Vernon61.9% PPS58.0% Math Laurelhurst65.1% Beverly Cleary64.8% Sunnyside46.5% Vernon54.5% PPS50.4%
  • Asian students 14 tested at Laurelhurst Reading (ELA) Laurelhurst78.6% Beverly Cleary38.5% Sunnysidefewer than 10 tested Vernonfewer than 10 tested PPS49.6% Math Laurelhurst71.4% Beverly Cleary38.5% Sunnysidefewer than 10 tested Vernonfewer than 10 tested PPS50.3%
  • Hispanic/Latino students 33 tested at Laurelhurst Reading (ELA) Laurelhurst68.8% Beverly Cleary59.4% Sunnyside53.7% Vernon31.7% PPS31.8% Math Laurelhurst56.3% Beverly Cleary53.1% Sunnyside35.9% Vernon22.7% PPS25.1%
  • Students with disabilities 73 tested at Laurelhurst Reading (ELA) Laurelhurst54.8% Beverly Cleary45.9% Sunnyside39.2% Vernon33.3% PPS33.2% Math Laurelhurst41.7% Beverly Cleary37.7% Sunnyside36.4% Vernon40.7% PPS29.9%
  • Students experiencing poverty 52 tested at Laurelhurst Reading (ELA) Laurelhurst47.1% Beverly Cleary46.2% Sunnyside38.0% Vernon28.1% PPS24.4% Math Laurelhurst33.3% Beverly Cleary20.0% Sunnyside40.0% Vernon27.6% PPS18.8%
  • Black students 13 tested at Laurelhurst Reading (ELA) Laurelhurst23.1% Beverly Clearyfewer than 10 tested Sunnysidefewer than 10 tested Vernon20.0% PPS18.6% Math Laurelhurst15.4% Beverly Clearyfewer than 10 tested Sunnysidefewer than 10 tested Vernon17.2% PPS11.7%
  • PPS average covers grades 3–8 only, the same grades Laurelhurst tests, so high school results don’t pull it down.
  • Groups are sorted by Laurelhurst’s reading score. These are every racial, ethnic, poverty, and disability group the state reports for Laurelhurst; groups with fewer than 10 students tested, including English learners, are suppressed by the state.
  • Asian (14 students) and Black (13 students) groups are small, so a few students can move their rates a lot.
  • Beverly Cleary, Sunnyside, and Vernon are the other K-8s PPS would convert whose students score at or above the PPS average overall in grades 3–8, counting reading and math together. (Vernon is 0.7 points below the PPS average in reading and 3.6 points above it in math.) They appear in the same order in every group. Students tested in reading (all / Hispanic/Latino / with disabilities / in poverty): Beverly Cleary 404 / 34 / 61 / 30; Sunnyside 310 / 41 / 79 / 50; Vernon 379 / 42 / 54 / 121.
  • Not every school beats the PPS average in every group: Beverly Cleary’s Asian students (16 tested) and Sunnyside’s White and multiracial students score below it. Where a school tested fewer than 10 students in a group, the state suppresses the result.

Poverty predicts most of the difference in reading scores between schools. Laurelhurst’s 6th through 8th graders read 4.6 points above what its poverty level predicts, with the highest scores of any PPS neighborhood school serving those grades.1

Every PPS school serving grades 6–8: reading (ELA) proficiency vs. expected Solid dot: share of grade 6–8 students meeting the reading standard, 2024-25. Open circle: what the school’s poverty share predicts. Number: points above (+) or below (−) expected. Names in color are the four converted K-8s from the “By student group” tab.
How “expected” works: poverty vs. grades 6–8 reading scores Each dot is one of the 26 PPS schools serving grades 6–8. The line is the best fit: about 87% minus 1.25 points for each percentage point of students in poverty.
10%30%50%70%90%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%ExpectedWinterhaven: 9% in poverty, 88.4% meeting the reading standardHayhurst/Odyssey: 17% in poverty, 78.1% meeting the reading standardBeverly Cleary: 7% in poverty, 78.0% meeting the reading standardSkyline: 8% in poverty, 71.8% meeting the reading standardSellwood: 10% in poverty, 71.3% meeting the reading standardGray: 15% in poverty, 70.5% meeting the reading standardWest Sylvan: 11% in poverty, 69.0% meeting the reading standardMt Tabor: 10% in poverty, 68.0% meeting the reading standardJackson: 18% in poverty, 66.2% meeting the reading standardHosford: 20% in poverty, 65.8% meeting the reading standardBeaumont: 16% in poverty, 64.8% meeting the reading standardda Vinci: 23% in poverty, 64.7% meeting the reading standardSunnyside Environmental: 16% in poverty, 61.9% meeting the reading standardBridger Creative Science: 20% in poverty, 61.6% meeting the reading standardAstor: 25% in poverty, 49.7% meeting the reading standardVernon: 32% in poverty, 48.6% meeting the reading standardHarrison Park: 39% in poverty, 46.8% meeting the reading standardHarriet Tubman: 31% in poverty, 46.2% meeting the reading standardKellogg: 35% in poverty, 45.2% meeting the reading standardRoseway Heights: 40% in poverty, 36.9% meeting the reading standardOckley Green: 32% in poverty, 34.6% meeting the reading standardLane/Brentwood: 44% in poverty, 29.9% meeting the reading standardGeorge: 56% in poverty, 24.9% meeting the reading standardCésar Chávez: 54% in poverty, 22.1% meeting the reading standardFaubion: 46% in poverty, 17.8% meeting the reading standardLaurelhurst: 11% in poverty, 78.2% meeting the reading standard, 4.6 points above expectedLaurelhurst4.6 above expected Share of tested students experiencing poverty

Vertical axis: share of grade 6–8 students meeting the reading standard

  • Neighborhood schools: the only school above Laurelhurst is Winterhaven, which admits by lottery. Just behind Laurelhurst are Odyssey (78.1%), a lottery-based focus program the state reports under Hayhurst, and Beverly Cleary (78.0%).
  • How “expected” works: across these 26 schools, the share of students in poverty predicts most of the difference in reading scores (89%). The best-fit line is roughly 87% minus 1.25 points for each percentage point of students in poverty. A school’s “expected” score is where it falls on that line; the number beside each row is its actual score minus expected. For example, Laurelhurst has about 11% of students in poverty, so it’s expected to score about 73.6%. It actually scored 78.2%, which is 4.6 points above expected.
  • Limits: for K-8s, the poverty share covers the whole school, including the younger grades. The line accounts only for poverty, not disability rates or lottery admission, which is one reason Winterhaven sits so far above it. Sunnyside, for example, tests the second-highest share of students with disabilities of these 26 schools, about 25%. It is one year of results (2024-25).
  • This compares different schools in one year, not the same students over time.

1 Laurelhurst and Beverly Cleary are essentially tied. 194 of Laurelhurst’s 248 tested 6th through 8th graders met the reading standard (78.2%), and 188 of Beverly Cleary’s 241 did (78.0%). One more Beverly Cleary student meeting the standard would have put it ahead. PPS would convert both schools. ↑

Poverty predicts most of the difference in math scores between schools, too. Vernon’s 6th through 8th graders score 10.0 points above what its poverty level predicts. No other PPS neighborhood school serving those grades beats its prediction by as much.

Every PPS school serving grades 6–8: math proficiency vs. expected Solid dot: share of grade 6–8 students meeting the math standard, 2024-25. Open circle: what the school’s poverty share predicts. Number: points above (+) or below (−) expected. Names in color are the four converted K-8s from the “By student group” tab.
How “expected” works: poverty vs. grades 6–8 math scores Each dot is one of the 26 PPS schools serving grades 6–8. The line is the best fit: about 77% minus 1.23 points for each percentage point of students in poverty.
10%30%50%70%90%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%ExpectedWinterhaven: 9% in poverty, 83.4% meeting the math standardHayhurst/Odyssey: 17% in poverty, 68.1% meeting the math standardBeverly Cleary: 7% in poverty, 67.9% meeting the math standardSellwood: 10% in poverty, 65.7% meeting the math standardSkyline: 8% in poverty, 63.4% meeting the math standardMt Tabor: 10% in poverty, 63.0% meeting the math standardWest Sylvan: 11% in poverty, 62.9% meeting the math standardBeaumont: 15% in poverty, 60.2% meeting the math standardGray: 15% in poverty, 57.2% meeting the math standardJackson: 17% in poverty, 56.3% meeting the math standardHosford: 20% in poverty, 51.0% meeting the math standardSunnyside Environmental: 16% in poverty, 48.9% meeting the math standardBridger Creative Science: 19% in poverty, 47.7% meeting the math standardHarriet Tubman: 30% in poverty, 44.7% meeting the math standardHarrison Park: 39% in poverty, 38.4% meeting the math standardAstor: 25% in poverty, 36.6% meeting the math standardKellogg: 35% in poverty, 33.8% meeting the math standardda Vinci: 22% in poverty, 33.4% meeting the math standardOckley Green: 31% in poverty, 30.6% meeting the math standardRoseway Heights: 39% in poverty, 26.7% meeting the math standardLane/Brentwood: 43% in poverty, 22.4% meeting the math standardGeorge: 56% in poverty, 13.8% meeting the math standardFaubion: 45% in poverty, 13.1% meeting the math standardCésar Chávez: 55% in poverty, 11.8% meeting the math standardLaurelhurst: 11% in poverty, 65.6% meeting the math standard, 2.2 points above expectedVernon: 32% in poverty, 47.9% meeting the math standard, 10.0 points above expectedVernon10.0 above expected Share of tested students experiencing poverty

Vertical axis: share of grade 6–8 students meeting the math standard

  • Vernon: about 32% of Vernon’s tested students are in poverty, so its middle graders are expected to score about 37.9% in math. They scored 47.9%, ahead of the PPS grades 6–8 average of 46.9%. Only two schools beat their predicted scores by more: Winterhaven and Odyssey, both of which admit students by lottery.2
  • Laurelhurst scored 65.6%, 2.2 points above expected, and Beverly Cleary scored 67.9%, about at expected. Both are well above the PPS grades 6–8 average.
  • How “expected” works: across these 26 schools, the share of students in poverty predicts most of the difference in math scores (86%). The best-fit line is roughly 77% minus 1.23 points for each percentage point of students in poverty. A school’s “expected” score is where it falls on that line; the number beside each row is its actual score minus expected.
  • Limits: for K-8s, the poverty share covers the whole school, including the younger grades. The line accounts only for poverty, not disability rates or lottery admission. In math, schools that test more students with disabilities tend to fall below the line; Sunnyside, for example, tests the second-highest share of these 26 schools, about 25%. It is one year of results (2024-25).
  • This compares different schools in one year, not the same students over time.

2 The author would like to note that Winterhaven, the math and science focus K-8, has the largest gap over expected math scores, at +17.8, while da Vinci, the arts focus school, has the largest gap under expected math scores, at −15.8 points (but +6.0 in reading). This seems like reasonable evidence that both schools are succeeding at their stated goals. ↑

Sources and method

← All issues