Summary:
ZIP code 60565 has 10 schools: eight elementary schools serving kindergarten through grade 5 and two middle schools serving grades 6–8. In 2025–2026, every school’s all-grade ELA and math results exceeded the corresponding state results of 56% and 40%. Elementary-school averages were 80% in ELA and 74% in math; the two middle schools averaged 84% and 67%, respectively, though the different grade groups are not direct comparisons. The clearest overall takeaway is that results are broadly above state figures, but elementary schools vary much more from one another than the middle schools do.
Meadow Glens Elementary School is the strongest overall elementary performer: it scored 93% in ELA and 87% in math, leading the next-highest elementary results by 10 and 8 points. Its fifth-grade science score was 97%, 20 points above the next-highest school. Spring Brook Elementary School stands out in third-grade math at 88%, the highest in that grade, and ranks second among elementary schools in all-grade math at 78%. At the lower end, Owen Elementary School had the lowest elementary all-grade ELA result, 67%, while Kingsley Elementary School had the lowest math result, 61%; both remain above state results. Among middle schools, Lincoln Junior High School narrowly led Madison Junior High School by 2 points in ELA and 1 point in math. SchoolDigger ranks Meadow Glens 14th of 1,737 schools statewide.
Recent changes are mixed: across the 10 schools, average ELA was essentially unchanged from 2024–2025, while average math fell 2 points. State results rose, narrowing the schools’ average advantage from 28 to 24 points in ELA and from 35 to 33 points in math. Individual results diverged: Madison gained 5 points in both subjects, while Kingsley’s math score fell 13 points. Context also varies: for 2024–2025, free/reduced lunch eligible shares were 6% at Spring Brook, 8% at Meadow Glens and 24% at Scott Elementary School. Meadow Glens had 475 students and a 12.8 student-teacher ratio, while Scott had 435 students and an 11.5 ratio, illustrating that size and ratios do not neatly track results; these figures provide context, not an explanation of performance.
Thank you for your feedback!