Independent Texas school research. TEA data, clearly explained. Not affiliated with the state agencyTEA.

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Bessie Coleman MS

Dallas County · Region 10: Richardson · 447 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
74/1002025-26
Change
+15 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−4.5 ptsvs 78.5 average · 2,074 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,401 of 2,074tied with 72 others
C74

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 59 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 78.5 average for 2,074 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Selected positive signals, not a summary of performance. The same rules choose them on every page: only the latest one-year gain, results meaningfully better than the currently selected comparison with broad reporting, and distinctive top-three placements. Demographics, staffing and spending cannot become academic “wins.” The overall rating and the full results below remain the complete picture for this school.

Read the full rating context and placement

Bessie Coleman MS is rated C by TEA, scoring 74 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 78.5 average for 2,074 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is up 15 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 1,401st of 2,074 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 72 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

Jump to a section
  1. Overview
  2. Official improvement and transfer notices
  3. 5 years of ratings
  4. Where the score comes from
  5. Student outcomes
  6. Who this school serves
  7. Student counts behind the percentages
  8. Enrollment over time
  9. Discipline and removal from class
  10. Spending per student
  11. Teachers and actual class size
  12. Where this comes from

Official improvement and transfer notices

Official state and federal designations can carry support, reporting requirements or a family transfer option that a single A–F rating does not explain.

2026 federal improvement status

Targeted Support and Improvement

Official support label: TSI

Identification reason: Economically Disadvantaged

TEA track year 0 · Title I campus

Open the official TEA list and methodology

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
32.0%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,074 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Not listed
Selected comparison
5.3%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,074 rated schools reporting

Selected comparison percentages are the share of reporting schools in that group found on each dated list. They are neutral prevalence context; changing the comparison never changes this school's official status.

These are dated TEA statuses, fetched 24 August 2026; they are not added to or subtracted from this site's rating.

5 years of ratings

Follow the solid line to see how this school has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.

Compare against
9080706050 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageBessie Coleman MS 5977596974 2021-222022-232023-242024-252025-26

2021-22 is shown under the refreshed methodology TEA adopted in 2023, so it is comparable with later years. Under the original scoring it was rated Not Rated with 59 that year.

Comparison lines follow the current rated cohort backward through time. The table gives the number in that fixed cohort that reported a score each year; it can be smaller than cohort membership.

View the yearly scores and comparisons
Rating history with comparisons
YearRatingScoreSelected comparisonSimilar economic-disadvantage rateStateTexas average
2025-26C7478.5 2,074 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25D6978.0 2,059 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24F5975.8 2,046 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23C7776.4 2,021 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22F5981.7 2,006 reporting83.7 7,283 reporting

Where the score comes from

Texas builds the overall rating from the better of Student Achievement and School Progress, weighted 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. School Progress is itself the better of Academic Growth and Relative Performance. The 60, 70, 80 and 90 rules mark the letter-grade thresholds.

  • Student Achievement64 D−10.4 vs similar economic context · 1,928 reporting
  • School Progress73 C−6.6 vs similar economic context · 1,922 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps77 C+1.3 vs similar economic context · 1,906 reporting
  • Academic Growth73 C+0.3 vs similar economic context · 1,863 reporting
  • Relative Performance69 D−9.0 vs similar economic context · 1,922 reporting
  • Bessie Coleman MS
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,074 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement64D6
School Progress73C7
Closing the Gaps77C3
Academic Growth73C7
Relative Performance69D1

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 3 points below B in that domain — the nearest of the measures that count toward the overall rating.

TEA does not add the domains up. The overall score is the better of Student Achievement and School Progress at 70%, plus Closing the Gaps at 30%. For this school that better measure is School Progress (73), so Student Achievement (64) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 73.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level61%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,928 reporting
  • Meets grade level32%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,928 reporting
  • Masters grade level10%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,928 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level75%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,925 reporting
  • Meets grade level49%±0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,925 reporting
  • Masters grade level17%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,925 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level55%−13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,916 reporting
  • Meets grade level24%−15 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,916 reporting
  • Masters grade level6%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,916 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level64%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,770 reporting
  • Meets grade level27%−14 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,770 reporting
  • Masters grade level8%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,770 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level33%−37 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 845 reporting
  • Meets grade level15%−27 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 845 reporting
  • Masters grade level6%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 845 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,074 in cohort)

Percentage of tests at or above each level. Masters is a subset of Meets, which is a subset of Approaches. The selected-comparison tick on each bar marks the average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate — a comparison TEA does not publish.

Counts in the comparison controls describe full cohort membership, not the denominator of every average. Each average uses only schools for which TEA reported that measure; metric-specific reporting counts are shown on the STAAR, graduation and CCMR rows and may vary.

Who this school serves

Placed after the results deliberately: this is context for reading them, not an explanation of them.

Students
447
Economically disadvantaged
74.7%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
7.4%−16.4 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
10.3%−8.5 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
93.1%−0.5 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
25.6%+6.6 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Bessie Coleman MS

African American: 67.3%Hispanic: 23.9%White: 2.9%American Indian: 0.2%Asian: 0.4%Two or More Races: 5.1%
  • African American 67.3%
  • Hispanic 23.9%
  • White 2.9%
  • American Indian 0.2%
  • Asian 0.4%
  • Two or More Races 5.1%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,074 reporting for every category shown · 2,074 in full cohort

African American: 13.1%Hispanic: 61.6%White: 19.9%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.9%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 3.1%
  • African American 13.1%
  • Hispanic 61.6%
  • White 19.9%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.9%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 3.1%

Student counts behind the percentages

Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.

Students in this TEA accountability summary
447
Economically disadvantaged students
334
Emergent bilingual students
33
Special education students
46

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
140
Students in TEA mobility denominator
577
TEA-published mobility rate
24.3%

The mobility count and rate use TEA’s separate 2024–25 campus denominator shown above, not current enrollment. This site does not recalculate a missing rate.

The first figure is TEA’s student count for this accountability summary. It is a separate publication from the fall PEIMS enrollment shown above and can differ; this site does not substitute one for the other. Counts come from TEA’s 2025-26 accountability summary, fetched 29 August 2026. A reported zero is shown as 0. Small-number and complementary masks, unavailable values, and blank not-reported fields stay separate and are never estimated. TEA masking definitions.

Enrollment over time

TEA-reported student enrollment for each available school year. Enrollment growth or decline is not a measure of school quality.

TEA reported 447 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 41 (8.4%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
447

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−41

Decrease · −8.4%

Change since 2021–22
−238

Decrease · −34.7%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
447
Selected comparison
638

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,045 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Bessie Coleman MS
School yearStudents enrolledBessie Coleman MSChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 685 First available year 655.7
2022–23 649 Decrease of 36 (5.3%) 659.6
2023–24 528 Decrease of 121 (18.6%) 656.7
2024–25 488 Decrease of 40 (7.6%) 654.2
2025–26 447 Decrease of 41 (8.4%) 638

The selected comparison column is the average enrollment among reporting schools in that group. It changes with the comparison control; this school's own counts do not.

Source: TEA PEIMS Student Program and Special Populations Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. TEA reports these counts from its fall student snapshot; changes compare adjacent reported school years.

These counts show how enrollment changed, not why. Attendance-zone changes, school openings or closures, grade reconfigurations, transfers and population shifts can affect the total.

Discipline and removal from class

TEA’s annual student and action counts, kept separate and divided only by the matching full-year enrollment. These figures describe removals from instruction, not a simple safe-or-unsafe score.

Students in TEA’s all-discipline count
240

42.9% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
595

106.25 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
560

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
42.9%
Selected comparison
13.2%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,564 rated schools reporting

+29.7 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
106.25
Selected comparison
31.7

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,671 rated schools reporting

+74.5 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Bessie Coleman MS
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 784 142 18.1% 307 39.16 9.1% 18.1
2021–22 779 286 36.7% 764 98.07 13.0% 30.9
2022–23 721 242 33.6% 523 72.54 13.5% 33.4
2023–24 590 218 37.0% 595 100.85 13.5% 33
2024–25 560 240 42.9% 595 106.25 13.2% 31.7
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Bessie Coleman MS in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 240 42.9% 595 106.25 13.2% 31.7
In-school suspensions 178 31.8% 308 55.00 11.7% 23.4
Out-of-school suspensions 150 26.8% 261 46.61 7.8% 11.9
DAEP placements 22 3.9% 26 4.64 5.3% 6.3
Mandatory DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —

Selected comparisons use rates, not raw counts, so differently sized schools can be read on the same basis. Each average uses only group members for which TEA reported that rate; this school's own counts and rates remain fixed.

Students, actions and incidents are different units. One student can receive multiple actions. The categories overlap, so they must not be added together. Rates use TEA's matching cumulative year-end enrollment, not the October enrollment shown elsewhere on this page.

Source: TEA Discipline Reports, fetched 24 August 2026. Suppressed values stay unavailable rather than being estimated. Use 2020–21 cautiously because remote instruction during the pandemic changed students' exposure to in-person discipline. TEA consolidated its separate action-group reports into this product in 2024–25; this trend uses only the stable “All discipline” heading.

Spending per student

The campus and its parent district stay fixed while the selected same-sector txschools.net comparison changes with the page-wide control. TEA's own peer group and statewide reference remain visible as separately published, fixed TEA references.

$5k$12k$20k20182020202220242025
  • Bessie Coleman MS
  • Parent district: Cedar Hill ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$9,503
Selected comparison
$13,151

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,057 rated schools reporting

−$3,648 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $9,503 per student for this campus, $16,573 per student for its parent district, Cedar Hill ISD, $18,972 per student for the Texas average.

Not reported in this TEA campus finance record: TEA peer group.

View yearly spending figures
Spending per student by year
YearBessie Coleman MSParent district: Cedar Hill ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$7,006$11,101$13,054$8,049 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,935 rated schools reporting
2019$6,747$12,597$13,108$8,189 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,953 rated schools reporting
2020$5,579$11,783$14,058$8,738 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,975 rated schools reporting
2021$6,024$12,202$14,797$9,305 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,987 rated schools reporting
2022$6,437$13,336$15,708$10,588 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,006 rated schools reporting
2023$6,232$14,649$16,792$11,163 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,021 rated schools reporting
2024$8,668$16,329$18,125$12,314 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,044 rated schools reporting
2025$9,503$16,573$18,972$13,151 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,057 rated schools reporting

The selected-comparison reporting count is year-specific and can vary across the table. Dollar amounts are shown as TEA published them and are not adjusted for inflation.

Teachers and actual class size

Average salary
$65,994−$655 vs similar economic context
Teachers
29−13.9 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
15.2+1.2 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Bessie Coleman MS

Beginning: 34%1 to 5 years: 26.2%6 to 10 years: 10.2%11 to 20 years: 26.9%21 to 30 years: 3.1%
  • Beginning 34%
  • 1 to 5 years 26.2%
  • 6 to 10 years 10.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 26.9%
  • 21 to 30 years 3.1%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,074 reporting for every category shown · 2,074 in full cohort

Beginning: 6.7%1 to 5 years: 27.5%6 to 10 years: 19%11 to 20 years: 27.2%21 to 30 years: 15.2%Over 30 years: 3.7%
  • Beginning 6.7%
  • 1 to 5 years 27.5%
  • 6 to 10 years 19%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.2%
  • 21 to 30 years 15.2%
  • Over 30 years 3.7%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Bessie Coleman MS in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classBessie Coleman MS · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Grade 623.817.8
Secondary English20.715.3
Secondary languages other than English21.518.1
Secondary math25.416.3
Secondary science18.717.6
Secondary social studies23.817.6

These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 6 of 12 categories for this campus; the categories are not combined into a made-up campus-wide average. Each selected comparison average uses only schools reporting that same grade or subject.

Source: TEA Texas Academic Performance Reports, fetched 24 August 2026.

Where this comes from

The Texas Education Agency publishes the underlying accountability reports and data downloads. Ratings, outcomes, demographics, staffing and finance on this page come from TEA data available through txschools.gov, fetched 15 August 2026. TEA’s Reports and Data Portal links the official bulk files. Enrollment history comes from TEA's PEIMS Student Program and Special Populations reports, fetched 24 August 2026. The student-count context comes from TEA’s bulk accountability summary, fetched 29 August 2026; TEA’s masking definitions explain withheld values. The dated notice, staffing, discipline, transfer, community and postsecondary sections cite their separate TEA, Census or THECB publication in place. Every archived source carries checksums so each number stays traceable to the bytes the public agency served.

Download the full dataset · this campus's district

Single-file records are pre-built for district-level records only, so there is no per-campus CSV to link here. Producing both formats for every entity would consume most of the 20,000-asset deployment limit before pages and shared data are counted. This campus is a row in the bulk files on the download page, keyed by its TEA id 057904042.