But how are the schools?
One of the biggest factors in choosing a neighborhood, and buying a house, is the quality of local public schools. And how do you measure a school's quality? Good question, I don't have the answer.
But latimes.com has a new and improved search tool that gives you a quick statistical portrait of more than 13,000 public and private schools in California. Check out the California Schools Guide, and by all means register your feedback here. You can use the guide to see test scores, enrollment statistics, SAT scores, enrollment by ethnic background and student-teacher ratios for each school. You can also register your thoughts and comments about an individual school and read the comments of others.
Among other things, I'm interested in hearing: Which pieces of information do you find most helpful in evaluating the quality of a school? Which pieces of additional information would you like to see?
--Peter Viles
Your thoughts? Comments? E-mail story tips to Peter Viles.
Photo: The newly-opened, $350-million Edward R. Roybal Learning Center in downtown Los Angeles. Credit: Associated Press



Usually I use greatschools.net and look at API's, number of AP classes, number of kids in the school lunch program, whether the school is improving from year to year or in decline. I found this info important for home buying even before I had kids as a general indicator of the "health" of the community. The LA Times site is great; I like being able to see the "worst" in LA county and being able to quickly compare LA to other counties. How is it possible that our "average" community high schools here score about the same as the special ed high school in SLO county? Our next move will probably be to Morro Bay or there'bouts. I'll keep this website tabbed.
Posted by: kosher krab | September 04, 2008 at 05:01 PM
I use the API reports. I have downloaded the raw data and turned it into a searchable/sortable excel spreadsheet. I then use the county, school district, and school name to map them to desirable neighborhoods. By those measures, the best districts in LA county are:
San Marino
Manhattan Beach
Palos Verdes
ABC Unified
Arcadia
Santa Monica
and
Glendale
Posted by: Pat | September 04, 2008 at 05:15 PM
La Canada didn't make your list, Pat?
Posted by: DVG | September 04, 2008 at 06:13 PM
Guys,
It is easy to rank school.
Look at demographics....
Please allow me to continue without racist remarks....
If you have a large percentage of Latino students, the school will be bad.
If you have a large percentage of white students, the school will be average-good.
If you have a large percentage of Asians, the school will be excellent.
Who does not agree with me (or these cold facts) ???
Posted by: Laker | September 04, 2008 at 06:44 PM
You are correct, I left La Canada off my list by mistake. I should also have included Hermosa Beach, but it is pretty tiny and does not even have its own high school.
Posted by: Pat | September 04, 2008 at 08:15 PM
Laker,
Seriously? Wow!!!
Your ignorance is showing
Posted by: inaweofE | September 04, 2008 at 08:50 PM
Laker, you have just made this a 200+ comment post.
Posted by: xtine | September 04, 2008 at 08:52 PM
No argument from me, Laker.
My question is: what is your point?
And then a better question to pose to you would be: Why is it this way?
Posted by: Amazing_Happens | September 04, 2008 at 09:27 PM
I agree with Laker...
Or rather, I agree, many people evaluate schools, neighborhoods, employees... that way.
Fact is whether a school can provide an adequate education for your child or how two or more schools' education compare cannot be determined by such aggregate numbers.
Comparing such statistics is comparing apples and oranges: They are samples of two different populations.
It's well known that aggregate school district performance numbers and income distribution are correlated.
Even if you built identical school buildings and hired identical twin teachers to teach, one in a "urban" school and the other in a "suburban" school, we could predict which school is "better".
This may seem unbelievable, but, if you want to know whether a school is good or bad, you should go and visit it and meet the principal... Incredible!
(More incredibly: I WAS educated in the urban public schools.)
Posted by: LA-renter | September 04, 2008 at 09:46 PM
Laker...you've got to be kidding.
My late mother was an education FREAK having graduated near the top of her class at University of Pennsylvania.
She never seemed to be able to make up her mind for myself and my siblings as to what the "best" school was.
I've attended Jewish Schools, Lutheran Schools, Public Schools, Private Schools in L.A. and a New England Prep School.
I have also volunteered as a substitute teacher for a couple years in the Midwest, and would teach at every school in the district and at all grade levels.
So...what have I learned?
Many of my old Harvard (prior to becoming Harvard/Westlake) buddies...well...what are they doing now? Some are Dr's & Lawyers. However....many of them...from what I hear...are just a bunch of coke-heads.
I also hear about some of my Asian childhood friends who are meth-heads now. I guess that kills your "best school" idea.
The Student Body President of my New England prep-school was African American. Fancy that.
From what I have seen, it's not as much the "school" as it is the amount of involvement that the parents dedicated to their child's education.
Ethnicity doesn't mean sh#t when it comes to education.
Posted by: E | September 04, 2008 at 09:58 PM
Laker, the data reliably breaks down the same way even *within* districts.
And Glendale's scores aren't actually that high. S. Pasadena's are a lot higher.
Posted by: Chris | September 04, 2008 at 10:21 PM
This site mashes up school scores with Google Maps. For California, API scores are color-coded by decile and plotted by location. It's incredibly useful.
http://schoolperformancemaps.com/
Posted by: Mousebender | September 04, 2008 at 10:30 PM
I can't believe it. I actually agree w/Laker on something.
Posted by: puckhead | September 04, 2008 at 10:54 PM
See Sandra Tsing Low's posts on this. Try kppc.org.
Posted by: Valley Observer | September 04, 2008 at 11:53 PM
What about Beverly Hills Unified? Not as good as the others?
Posted by: DVG | September 05, 2008 at 12:26 AM
Pat,
Not sure if your list is that accurate. For example, the highly coveted Walnut Valley Unified, which covers Walnut and Diamond Bar, has both of its high schools listed in the top 20 of the county. All of its elementary schools are in the top 100.
The problem is that half of Walnut is covered in the not-so-desireable Rowland Heights Unified, and half of Diamond Bar is covered in the not-so-desireable Pomona Unified.
It would probably be a more useful exercise to rank the top school districts in the county, and show which towns there are in. I'm willing to bet that the neighborhoods that fall in these districts held their price better than similar houses in the same city that are in a worse school district.
Using the example above, with Redfin as my guide, houses in Diamond Bar that are in the Walnut Valley school district have sold quicker (with more recent sales), and have held the value better than the houses in the Pomona Unified part of town.
Posted by: Nate | September 05, 2008 at 12:56 AM
Pete: Please don't let "Laker's" opinion, such as it is, turn this blog into another bashing session. I see enough of that as it is in other Times blogs and hope that people here can make intelligent, on point comments about real estate and not stoop to infantile racist rants.
Thanks--
Posted by: 356man | September 05, 2008 at 05:58 AM
This is a good topic to ponder when deciding to buy a house, and since I am currently struggling to buy a decent house in above average school areas. I left Crescenta Valley HS area recently, when my oldest graduated, and since I have been looking for a modest house (3 bed/ 2bath) in a decent area. I left Crescenta Valley area because the houses are way above what is worth, and I think the schools are over rated. The reason for a good school rating is because of children / parent involvement, and not just school staff.
Now as to selecting an area, I have focused on using 30/30/30 rule in demographic makeup (Hispanic/ White/ Asian). I hate to sound racist, but the reality mirrors my comparison. When I grew up back in 70/80s the makeup was 90 % Whites, and 3% Asians in those areas. Secondly I look at API score of 8 to 10, then SAT score.
If Hispanic population exceeds the ratio, then the scores of interest drop. If Whites exceed the ratio, the scores remain the same, and when Asians exceed the ratio… Well just say I will not be able to afford to buy a house.
I am looking for 450k house with 25% down, and still not successful even though the real-estate market is in a quagmire. I am currently looking in Northridge/ Burbank/ Woodland Hills. I have over 800 credit rating with over 100k income. That says nothing when the areas of interest have no bargains.
Posted by: ourpark | September 05, 2008 at 06:57 AM
I hate to admit it, but Laker is not too far off the mark, and there's nothing racist about it.
It is not that Latino students are inherently lousy students or Asians are inherently phenomenal students.
What you're actually looking at is the correlation between ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Non-Asian minorities tend to be poorer, and poorer students don't do as well in school. That's a fact that has been widely substantiated by published studies.
Parents from poorer families tend to a) have less time to spend helping their children learn, and b) have less education themselves and are thus unable to help their children study. That is, if you only have an 8th grade education and you're working two jobs, how can you help your son or daughter learn algebra or chemistry? Parents who are better educated tend to a) recognize the value of education more, b) have the financial wherewithal to expose their children to valuable learning experiences, and c) have more available time to dedicate to helping their kids directly.
Posted by: perks | September 05, 2008 at 07:03 AM
There is sort of a hierarchy of needs when it comes to schools. Here's a list, starting from the most basic.
First, my child should not be harmed by going to school. The school should take action when it receives complaints about bullying. The cafeteria should not serve toxic food. The buildings must not be on the verge of collapse.
Second, my child should not be indoctrinated into some strange belief system by a school. My belief system is fairly common -- a vaguely Christian Californian that believes in respect and hard work -- and almost all teachers would be fine with me. You do get the occasional strange teacher, though.
Third, my child should be able to work at his level. This does mean that new non-English speaking immigrants and native English speakers should each have opportunities tailored to them.
Fourth, my child should not be in an environment that ridicules success and optimism or discourages going to college.
Last and least important, my school should have a decent track team or swim team.
Posted by: Mike | September 05, 2008 at 07:54 AM
Laker,
You have officialy made me un-happy.
Posted by: happymexican | September 05, 2008 at 08:00 AM
Peter, I think the LAT is a little late to the party on this one. Greatschools.net has been a very popular, useful site for years now. And while APIs aren't everything, they're a good starting point.
On another note, I'm dying to read Sandra Tsing Loh's new book, Mother on Fire, which is about her experience with getting her daughters into LAUSD schools. Anybody else read it yet?
Pat, most of the La Canada schools are in the Glendale district, which is why Glendale numbers skew so high. You'd find a different story re school scores with the schools in south Glendale. Also, check out the Burbank district.
Laker, you're hopeless. But this requires an answer, and it's an obvious one: socioeconomics play the biggest part in good/bad schools, not race. In wealthier areas, the parents tend to have more money to donate to schools for extra programs, tutoring, etc., plus more time to volunteer at those schools and more time to spend with their children's educational needs. IMHO, we need much more money poured into classroom education in public schools.
Posted by: sfvrealestate | September 05, 2008 at 08:07 AM
not to sound elitist (hey, at least i'm not racist!), but i really want to know how many of the kids from a given school graduate and attend college.
i don't know how to quantify it, exactly, but i also want to know how much diverse skills (like creativity, innovation and interpersonal relationships) are valued and encouraged, since the world needs more than a bunch of drone-like human calculators. we already have computers to spit information back at us. we need people with ideas and the ability to discuss and refine those ideas.
this reflects a certain value system that interests me, for what it's worth.
Posted by: sheila | September 05, 2008 at 08:21 AM
Tell us perks and Laker why is it then that white people can't dance?
Posted by: collegedude | September 05, 2008 at 08:45 AM
What Perks and Laker say is true. It's kind of sad, but I doubt someone can show a school in SoCal where the highest percentage of the student body is Latino or Black and that's in the top 10%.
I was born and raised in Chile and lived there for 19 years. My parents are from Taiwan. I can say from experience that in general Asian parents value education more than Latino families. Sometimes the obsession with education goes a bit too far with endless hours of afterschool tutoring, no time for sports or just playing with toys. However, you can see why the top schools and top colleges have an overwhelming number of Asian students. Just check the Asian student enrollment at UCLA and Berkeley.
Posted by: Last Laugh | September 05, 2008 at 08:53 AM