Chin (John Yehall) Elementary vs Parker (Jean) Elementary

Chin (John Yehall) Elementary and Parker (Jean) Elementary sit just 0.4 miles apart in San Francisco and serve the same grade span, KG–05, yet their state rankings diverge meaningfully. Parker (Jean) Elementary holds the stronger overall position, ranked #30 of 9,533 California schools, while Chin (John Yehall) Elementary ranks #49 of 9,533 — both well inside the top 1% statewide, but a 19-slot gap that reflects real differences beneath the surface-level rating.

On academics, Chin (John Yehall) Elementary holds a decisive edge: its academic score of 10.0/10 outpaces Parker (Jean) Elementary's 9.2/10 — a 0.8-point spread that is the largest measurable difference between the two schools. Growth scores are identical at 9.7/10 for both Chin (John Yehall) Elementary and Parker (Jean) Elementary, meaning students at each school are advancing at similarly strong rates regardless of where they start. Parents prioritizing raw proficiency will find Chin stronger; those focused on trajectory will find the schools equivalent.

The clearest structural difference between the two schools is class size. Chin (John Yehall) Elementary enrolls 253 students at a student-teacher ratio of 23.0:1, while Parker (Jean) Elementary serves 125 students at 17.9:1 — more than five fewer students per teacher. That smaller ratio at Parker means more individual attention per child in a building that is also roughly half the size. Free and reduced lunch eligibility is similar at both campuses: 75% at Chin (John Yehall) Elementary and 80% at Parker (Jean) Elementary, indicating both schools serve predominantly low-income populations and carry comparable equity contexts.

Both schools share the same grade configuration and are geographically interchangeable for most San Francisco families. The primary trade-off is between Chin's higher academic proficiency ceiling and Parker's lower student-teacher ratio. Parker's superior state rank despite a lower academic score suggests its overall profile — including equity outcomes and environment components — balances more evenly across all dimensions of the rating system.