+10.7 ptsvs 79.3 average · 2,019 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
259 of 2,019tied with 63 others
Score vs region
+10.2 ptsvs 79.8 average · 129 rated schools in Region 03: Victoria
Region 03: Victoria placement
16 of 129tied with 6 others
Score vs county
+15.1 ptsvs 74.9 average · 18 rated schools in Wharton County
Wharton County placement
4 of 18among reporting schools
Score vs similar-size group
+8.0 ptsvs 82 average · 413 similarly sized rated schools
Similar size placement
91 of 413tied with 29 others
Score vs state
+8.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
Texas placement
1,571 of 7,646tied with 341 others
A90
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 70 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 79.3 average for 2,019 rated schools serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 79.8 average for 129 rated schools in Region 03: Victoria.The current score is above the 74.9 average for 18 rated schools in Wharton County.The current score is above the 82 average for 413 similarly sized rated schools.The current score is above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools.
Evidence worth noticing
Strengths and momentum
STAAR result
All Subjects above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters
Meets
55%vs 46.5% avg · +8.5 pts
Masters
22%vs 18.7% avg · +3.3 pts
Among 1,901 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
A precomputed strengths set is not available for this pinned entity. The page’s direct numeric comparisons still update to that pin.
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
Louise JH is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 79.3 average for 2,019 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is up 22 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 259th of 2,019 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 63 others).
Louise JH is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 79.8 average for 129 rated schools in Region 03: Victoria. It is up 22 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 16th of 129 rated schools in Region 03: Victoria (tied with 6 others).
Louise JH is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 74.9 average for 18 rated schools in Wharton County. It is up 22 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 4th of 18 rated schools in Wharton County.
Louise JH is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 82 average for 413 similarly sized rated schools. It is up 22 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 91st of 413 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 29 others).
Louise JH is rated A by TEA, scoring 90 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools. It is up 22 points since 2021-22.
Follow the solid line to see how this school has changed. Turn comparison lines on or off to add context.
Compare against
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 C with 70 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.
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 Achievement83 B+6.6 vs similar economic context · 1,901 reporting
School Progress90 A+9.7 vs similar economic context · 1,894 reporting
Closing the Gaps91 A+14.5 vs similar economic context · 1,881 reporting
Academic Growth81 B+7.6 vs similar economic context · 1,833 reporting
Relative Performance90 A+11.3 vs similar economic context · 1,894 reporting
Louise JH
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,019 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
83
B
7
School Progress
90
A
—
Closing the Gaps
91
A
—
Academic Growth
81
B
9
Relative Performance
90
A
—
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 (90), so
Student Achievement (83) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 90.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level80%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,901 reporting
Meets grade level55%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,901 reporting
Masters grade level22%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,901 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level81%+7 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,899 reporting
Meets grade level62%+11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,899 reporting
Masters grade level28%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,899 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level83%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,891 reporting
Meets grade level57%+16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,891 reporting
Masters grade level18%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,891 reporting
Science3 performance levels
Approaches grade level81%+9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,750 reporting
Meets grade level52%+8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,750 reporting
Masters grade level19%−0 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,750 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
Approaches grade level68%−5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 898 reporting
Meets grade level29%−16 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 898 reporting
Masters grade level16%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 898 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,019 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
106
Economically disadvantaged
68.9%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
11.3%−8.8 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
13.2%−5.6 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
95.4%+1.4 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
12.3%−5.2 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Louise JH
African American 2.8%
Hispanic 64.2%
White 30.2%
Asian 1.9%
Two or More Races 0.9%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,019 reporting for every category shown · 2,019 in full cohort
African American 12.1%
Hispanic 55.9%
White 25.9%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 2.1%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 3.5%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 03: Victoria · 129 reporting for every category shown · 129 in full cohort
African American 6%
Hispanic 57.6%
White 33.3%
American Indian 0.2%
Asian 0.7%
Two or More Races 2.1%
Selected comparison averageFor Wharton County · 18 reporting for every category shown · 18 in full cohort
African American 10.5%
Hispanic 58.2%
White 29.1%
American Indian 0.1%
Asian 0.4%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 1.6%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 413 reporting for every category shown · 413 in full cohort
African American 6.3%
Hispanic 47%
White 42.9%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 0.6%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 2.9%
Statewide average7,646 reporting for every category shown · 7,646 Texas schools in full cohort
African American 11.5%
Hispanic 52.6%
White 27.8%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 4.2%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.4%
Student counts behind the percentages
Context only. These counts are not rankings, comparisons, or judgments about school quality.
Students in this TEA accountability summary
106
Economically disadvantaged students
73
Emergent bilingual students
12
Special education students
14
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
14
Students in TEA mobility denominator
116
TEA-published mobility rate
12.1%
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 106 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 3 (2.8%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
106
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−3
Decrease · −2.8%
Change since 2021–22
−13
Decrease · −10.9%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
106
Selected comparison
640.4
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,981 rated schools reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Louise JH
School year
Students enrolledLouise JH
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
119
First available year
654
2022–23
122
Increase of 3 (2.5%)
660.9
2023–24
117
Decrease of 5 (4.1%)
659.1
2024–25
109
Decrease of 8 (6.8%)
656.8
2025–26
106
Decrease of 3 (2.8%)
640.4
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.
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
11.2% of cumulative year-end enrollment
Disciplinary actions
27
23.28 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
116
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
This school
11.2%
Selected comparison
13.0%
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,539 rated schools reporting
−1.8 pts vs similar economic context
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This school
23.28
Selected comparison
30.9
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,651 rated schools reporting
−7.6 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Louise JH
School year
Cumulative enrollment
Studentsall discipline
Students% of enrollment
Actionsall discipline
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21
120
25
20.8%
60
50.00
9.7%
19.5
2021–22
123
33
26.8%
76
61.79
12.9%
30.5
2022–23
131
32
24.4%
74
56.49
13.5%
32.5
2023–24
125
29
23.2%
56
44.80
13.4%
32.5
2024–25
116
13
11.2%
27
23.28
13.0%
30.9
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Louise JH in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
13
11.2%
27
23.28
13.0%
30.9
In-school suspensions
12
10.3%
21
18.10
11.7%
23.5
Out-of-school suspensions
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
DAEP placements
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
Mandatory DAEP placements
Not reported
—
Not reported
—
—
—
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.
Louise JH
Parent district: Louise ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$10,157
Selected comparison
$13,163
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,998 rated schools reporting
−$3,006 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $10,157 per student for this campus, $16,632 per student for its parent district, Louise 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
Year
Louise JH
Parent district: Louise ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$4,467
$12,252
$13,054
$8,002
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,861 rated schools reporting
2019
$5,396
$12,297
$13,108
$8,163
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,878 rated schools reporting
2020
$6,189
$13,330
$14,058
$8,711
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,899 rated schools reporting
2021
$8,034
$14,461
$14,797
$9,208
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,913 rated schools reporting
2022
$10,694
$15,689
$15,708
$10,446
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,936 rated schools reporting
2023
$10,092
$16,526
$16,792
$11,110
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,957 rated schools reporting
2024
$10,799
$17,117
$18,125
$12,354
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,983 rated schools reporting
2025
$10,157
$16,632
$18,972
$13,163
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,998 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
$66,539+$114 vs similar economic context
Teachers
8−35.3 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
13.4−0.6 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Louise JH
1 to 5 years 24.1%
6 to 10 years 16.5%
11 to 20 years 49.4%
21 to 30 years 8.9%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,019 reporting for every category shown · 2,019 in full cohort
Beginning 6.4%
1 to 5 years 26.8%
6 to 10 years 19%
11 to 20 years 27.6%
21 to 30 years 15.5%
Over 30 years 3.9%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 03: Victoria · 129 reporting for every category shown · 129 in full cohort
Beginning 7.1%
1 to 5 years 24.6%
6 to 10 years 15.4%
11 to 20 years 29.3%
21 to 30 years 17.1%
Over 30 years 6.4%
Selected comparison averageFor Wharton County · 18 reporting for every category shown · 18 in full cohort
Beginning 7.1%
1 to 5 years 26.1%
6 to 10 years 16.5%
11 to 20 years 29.4%
21 to 30 years 16.6%
Over 30 years 4.2%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 413 reporting for every category shown · 413 in full cohort
Beginning 7.2%
1 to 5 years 22.6%
6 to 10 years 16.5%
11 to 20 years 26.7%
21 to 30 years 18%
Over 30 years 7.2%
Statewide average7,646 reporting for every category shown · 7,646 Texas schools in full cohort
Beginning 6.2%
1 to 5 years 25.6%
6 to 10 years 19.2%
11 to 20 years 28.7%
21 to 30 years 15.9%
Over 30 years 3.7%
Average students in a class
TEA average class size by grade or subject for Louise JH in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classLouise JH · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Grade 6
17
17.8
Secondary English
17.8
15.2
Secondary math
14.1
16.2
Secondary science
14.8
17.5
Secondary social studies
19
17.4
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.
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 16
Closing the Gaps
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
7 measures
2of 16
Math — Meets
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure
2of 15
Academic Growth
Wharton County · of the 15 that report this measure · tied with 1
3of 16
Relative Performance
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 2
3of 16
All Subjects — Masters
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Reading — Masters
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure
3of 16
Math — Approaches
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 2
3of 16
Math — Masters
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
16 measures
4of 18
Overall score
Wharton County · of the 18 that report this measure
4of 16
School Progress
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
4of 16
Reading — Meets
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure
5of 16
All Subjects — Meets
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure
5of 16
Reading — Approaches
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure · tied with 1
5of 14
Science — Approaches
Wharton County · of the 14 that report this measure · tied with 1
5of 14
Science — Meets
Wharton County · of the 14 that report this measure
5of 10
Social Studies — Masters
Wharton County · of the 10 that report this measure
6of 14
Science — Masters
Wharton County · of the 14 that report this measure
7of 17
Attendance
Wharton County · of the 17 that report this measure
7of 16
Student Achievement
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure
7of 16
All Subjects — Approaches
Wharton County · of the 16 that report this measure
7of 10
Social Studies — Approaches
Wharton County · of the 10 that report this measure
7of 10
Social Studies — Meets
Wharton County · of the 10 that report this measure
8of 18
Per-student spending
Wharton County · of the 18 that report this measure
8of 17
Chronically absent (lowest is best)
Wharton County · of the 17 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.
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 241906041.