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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

James Bowie MS

Bowie County · Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 101 students

Official school websiteSchool information and family resources

Current score
77/1002025-26
Change
−3 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−4.4 ptsvs 81.4 average · 1,772 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,202 of 1,772tied with 59 others
C77

At a glance

Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving down; under the rules in force back then it scored 81 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 81.4 average for 1,772 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

Recent domain gain

Academic Growth rose 2 points

79 to 81 2024-25 to 2025-26

  • 81 is 5.9 points above the 75.1 average among 1,655 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

Current strength

Chronically absent lower than the similar-context average

0% −14.9 pts vs 14.9%

  • 0% is 14.9 percentage points lower than the 14.9% average among 1,718 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
  • Tied for 1st-lowest of 1,718 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure; 7 schools share that value.
See the full measure

Current strength

Attendance above the similar-context average

96.4% +1.9 pts vs 94.5%

  • 96.4% is 1.9 percentage points above the 94.5% average among 1,718 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measure

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

James Bowie MS is rated C by TEA, scoring 77 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 81.4 average for 1,772 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 3 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 1,202nd of 1,772 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 59 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 school ranks best
  13. 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.

Schools identified for improvement

This school
Listed
Selected comparison
21.7%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,772 rated schools reporting

Schools on the PEG list

This school
Not listed
Selected comparison
1.4%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,772 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
908070 Similar economic-disadvantage rateTexas averageJames Bowie MS 8084758277 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 B with 81 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
2025-26C7781.4 1,772 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25B8281.5 1,750 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24C7579.4 1,724 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23B8480.1 1,697 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22B8083.0 1,673 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 Achievement76 C−4.8 vs similar economic context · 1,702 reporting
  • School Progress81 B−0.3 vs similar economic context · 1,695 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps68 D−10.6 vs similar economic context · 1,680 reporting
  • Academic Growth81 B+5.9 vs similar economic context · 1,655 reporting
  • Relative Performance75 C−4.2 vs similar economic context · 1,695 reporting
  • James Bowie MS
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,772 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement76C4
School Progress81B9
Closing the Gaps68D2
Academic Growth81B9
Relative Performance75C5

Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 2 points below C 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 (81), so Student Achievement (76) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 81.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level74%−3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,702 reporting
  • Meets grade level42%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,702 reporting
  • Masters grade level18%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,702 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level77%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,700 reporting
  • Meets grade level47%−10 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,700 reporting
  • Masters grade level24%+0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,700 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level77%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,692 reporting
  • Meets grade level43%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,692 reporting
  • Masters grade level14%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,692 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level71%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,560 reporting
  • Meets grade level38%−13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,560 reporting
  • Masters grade level17%−7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,560 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level64%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 878 reporting
  • Meets grade level33%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 878 reporting
  • Masters grade level14%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 878 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,772 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
101
Economically disadvantaged
53.5%−0.4 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
2.0%−12.0 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
14.9%−3.9 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
96.4%+1.9 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
0.0%−14.9 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

James Bowie MS

Hispanic: 4%White: 90.1%Asian: 1%Two or More Races: 5%
  • Hispanic 4%
  • White 90.1%
  • Asian 1%
  • Two or More Races 5%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,772 reporting for every category shown · 1,772 in full cohort

African American: 9.9%Hispanic: 43.1%White: 39.6%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 2.8%Pacific Islander: 0.2%Two or More Races: 4.1%
  • African American 9.9%
  • Hispanic 43.1%
  • White 39.6%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 2.8%
  • Pacific Islander 0.2%
  • Two or More Races 4.1%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
101
Economically disadvantaged students
54
Emergent bilingual students
2
Special education students
15

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
14
Students in TEA mobility denominator
124
TEA-published mobility rate
11.3%

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 101 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 14 (12.2%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
101

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−14

Decrease · −12.2%

Change since 2021–22
−16

Decrease · −13.7%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
101
Selected comparison
637

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,732 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for James Bowie MS
School yearStudents enrolledJames Bowie MSChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 117 First available year 639.2
2022–23 132 Increase of 15 (12.8%) 645.5
2023–24 130 Decrease of 2 (1.5%) 645.2
2024–25 115 Decrease of 15 (11.5%) 642.1
2025–26 101 Decrease of 14 (12.2%) 637

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
13

10.5% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
21

16.94 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
124

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
10.5%
Selected comparison
12.3%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,373 rated schools reporting

−1.8 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
16.94
Selected comparison
27.6

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,479 rated schools reporting

−10.7 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for James Bowie MS
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 121 Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
2021–22 132 21 15.9% 35 26.52 12.3% 27.7
2022–23 148 26 17.6% 35 23.65 12.7% 29.4
2023–24 141 18 12.8% 24 17.02 12.7% 29.5
2024–25 124 13 10.5% 21 16.94 12.3% 27.6
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for James Bowie MS in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 13 10.5% 21 16.94 12.3% 27.6
In-school suspensions 13 10.5% 20 16.13 11.1% 21.4
Out-of-school suspensions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary DAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
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.

$6k$13k$20k20182020202220242025
  • James Bowie MS
  • Parent district: Simms ISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$9,202
Selected comparison
$12,175

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,747 rated schools reporting

−$2,973 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $9,202 per student for this campus, $15,576 per student for its parent district, Simms 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
YearJames Bowie MSParent district: Simms ISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$6,755$10,268$13,054$7,886 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,615 rated schools reporting
2019$6,762$13,476$13,108$8,068 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,631 rated schools reporting
2020$7,040$13,531$14,058$8,614 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,646 rated schools reporting
2021$7,282$13,184$14,797$9,008 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,663 rated schools reporting
2022$7,903$14,637$15,708$10,279 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,676 rated schools reporting
2023$7,623$14,697$16,792$10,851 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,697 rated schools reporting
2024$8,267$15,263$18,125$11,736 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,721 rated schools reporting
2025$9,202$15,576$18,972$12,175 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,747 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
$52,133−$14,483 vs similar economic context
Teachers
11−30.5 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
8.9−10.6 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

James Bowie MS

1 to 5 years: 43.9%6 to 10 years: 6.1%11 to 20 years: 21.9%21 to 30 years: 18.4%Over 30 years: 8.8%
  • 1 to 5 years 43.9%
  • 6 to 10 years 6.1%
  • 11 to 20 years 21.9%
  • 21 to 30 years 18.4%
  • Over 30 years 8.8%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,772 reporting for every category shown · 1,772 in full cohort

Beginning: 5.8%1 to 5 years: 24.9%6 to 10 years: 19.2%11 to 20 years: 28.9%21 to 30 years: 16.5%Over 30 years: 4.3%
  • Beginning 5.8%
  • 1 to 5 years 24.9%
  • 6 to 10 years 19.2%
  • 11 to 20 years 28.9%
  • 21 to 30 years 16.5%
  • Over 30 years 4.3%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for James Bowie MS in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classJames Bowie MS · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Grade 611.517.6
Secondary English15.514.9
Secondary math15.315.8
Secondary science1617.4
Secondary social studies1617.3

These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 5 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 school ranks best

Out of 120 rankings computed across every published metric and every available comparison group, these are all the measures that meet this site’s distinctive-placement threshold. The list does not change when you change Compare against. Each measure appears once, using its strongest placement. Press Copy for a citable sentence.

#1 rankings

First-place results

1 measure

  • 1of 7,358

    Chronically absent (lowest is best)

    Texas average · of the 7,358 that report this measure · tied with 21 · full ranking

#4–10 rankings

Fourth- through tenth-place results

1 measure

  • 5of 134

    Attendance

    Region 08: Mt Pleasant · of the 134 that report this measure

These are selected high placements, not a summary. Every figure above this section is the full picture, including where this school ranks poorly. Each measure appears once here, using its strongest qualifying placement across all available comparison groups. Very large ties are left out because they do not distinguish this school; any tie that does appear is labeled. Every ranking this site publishes, including the ones no school would put in a press release.

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 019909041.