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

txschools.netSchool data with context

Traditional public school campus

Miller Jordan MS

Cameron County · Region 01: Edinburg · 438 students

Current score
77/1002025-26
Change
−5 ptssince 2021-22
Score vs similar economic context
−0.7 ptsvs 77.7 average · 1,795 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
1,035 of 1,795tied with 56 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 78 in 2021-22. The current score is below the 77.7 average for 1,795 rated schools serving a similar economic context.

Evidence worth noticing

Strengths and momentum

STAAR result

Reading above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters

Meets
49%vs 44% avg · +5 pts
Masters
21%vs 17.6% avg · +3.4 pts

Among 1,668 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

Miller Jordan MS is rated C by TEA, scoring 77 out of 100 for 2025-26 — below the 77.7 average for 1,795 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is down 5 points since 2021-22.

Ranks 1,035th of 1,795 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 56 others).

Put the numbers in context

Compare with

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

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 averageMiller Jordan MS 8269537477 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 C with 78 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
2025-26C7777.7 1,795 reporting81.3 7,646 reporting
2024-25C7477.5 1,778 reporting81.2 7,554 reporting
2023-24F5373.9 1,762 reporting78.9 7,466 reporting
2022-23D6973.3 1,758 reporting79.1 7,377 reporting
2021-22B8282.0 1,736 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 Achievement67 D−3.2 vs similar economic context · 1,668 reporting
  • School Progress79 C+0.1 vs similar economic context · 1,665 reporting
  • Closing the Gaps73 C−2.1 vs similar economic context · 1,656 reporting
  • Academic Growth67 D−6.4 vs similar economic context · 1,643 reporting
  • Relative Performance79 C+2.2 vs similar economic context · 1,664 reporting
  • Miller Jordan MS
  • Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,795 in cohort)
Domain scores
DomainScoreGradePoints to next grade
Student Achievement67D3
School Progress79C1
Closing the Gaps73C7
Academic Growth67D3
Relative Performance79C1

Closest to moving up: School Progress, 1 point 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 (79), so Student Achievement (67) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 79.

Student outcomes

STAAR performance

All Subjects

  • Approaches grade level62%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,668 reporting
  • Meets grade level35%−6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,668 reporting
  • Masters grade level12%−4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,668 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level73%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,668 reporting
  • Meets grade level49%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,668 reporting
  • Masters grade level21%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,668 reporting
Math3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level58%−8 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,665 reporting
  • Meets grade level28%−11 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,665 reporting
  • Masters grade level6%−9 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,665 reporting
Science3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level69%+6 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,576 reporting
  • Meets grade level38%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,576 reporting
  • Masters grade level16%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,576 reporting
Social Studies3 performance levels
  • Approaches grade level37%−25 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 520 reporting
  • Meets grade level16%−18 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 520 reporting
  • Masters grade level3%−12 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 520 reporting
  • Approaches grade level
  • Meets grade level
  • Masters grade level
  • Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,795 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
438
Economically disadvantaged
95.2%+2.9 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
19.4%−22.7 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
19.4%+1.9 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
90.4%−2.5 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
41.0%+17.6 pts vs similar economic context

Student demographics

Miller Jordan MS

Hispanic: 99.1%White: 0.7%American Indian: 0.2%
  • Hispanic 99.1%
  • White 0.7%
  • American Indian 0.2%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting for every category shown · 1,795 in full cohort

African American: 14.9%Hispanic: 77.3%White: 4.8%American Indian: 0.3%Asian: 1.2%Pacific Islander: 0.1%Two or More Races: 1.4%
  • African American 14.9%
  • Hispanic 77.3%
  • White 4.8%
  • American Indian 0.3%
  • Asian 1.2%
  • Pacific Islander 0.1%
  • Two or More Races 1.4%

Student counts behind the percentages

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

Students in this TEA accountability summary
438
Economically disadvantaged students
417
Emergent bilingual students
85
Special education students
85

Campus mobility · 2024–25

Mobile students
151
Students in TEA mobility denominator
539
TEA-published mobility rate
28%

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 438 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 39 (8.2%) from 2024–25.

Latest enrollment
438

2025–26

Change from 2024–25
−39

Decrease · −8.2%

Change since 2021–22
−261

Decrease · −37.3%

Enrollment in 2025–26

This school
438
Selected comparison
561.7

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,777 rated schools reporting

Student enrollment by school year for Miller Jordan MS
School yearStudents enrolledMiller Jordan MSChange from previous school yearAverage enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22 699 First available year 609.7
2022–23 640 Decrease of 59 (8.4%) 605.7
2023–24 590 Decrease of 50 (7.8%) 595.7
2024–25 477 Decrease of 113 (19.2%) 588.9
2025–26 438 Decrease of 39 (8.2%) 561.7

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
212

40.5% of cumulative year-end enrollment

Disciplinary actions
702

133.97 per 100 students

Cumulative year-end enrollment
524

2024–25

Share of students · 2024–25

This school
40.5%
Selected comparison
13.1%

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,048 rated schools reporting

+27.4 pts vs similar economic context

Actions per 100 students · 2024–25

This school
133.97
Selected comparison
31

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,137 rated schools reporting

+103.0 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Miller Jordan MS
School yearCumulative enrollmentStudentsall disciplineStudents% of enrollmentActionsall disciplineActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21 818 26 3.2% 30 3.67 6.9% 13.1
2021–22 742 196 26.4% 413 55.66 12.5% 29.7
2022–23 647 184 28.4% 462 71.41 13.6% 32.8
2023–24 625 240 38.4% 827 132.32 13.7% 33.1
2024–25 524 212 40.5% 702 133.97 13.1% 31
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Miller Jordan MS in 2024–25
CategoryStudentsStudents% of enrollmentActionsActionsper 100 studentsStudentsselected comparison average %Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline 212 40.5% 702 133.97 13.1% 31
In-school suspensions 193 36.8% 519 99.05 11.4% 22
Out-of-school suspensions 70 13.4% 126 24.05 9.6% 16
DAEP placements 44 8.4% 56 10.69 5.1% 6.2
Mandatory DAEP placements 24 4.6% 26 4.96 3.9% 4.6
Discretionary DAEP placements 24 4.6% 30 5.73 3.3% 4
JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Mandatory JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary JJAEP placements Not reported — Not reported — — —
Expulsions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —
Mandatory expulsions Not reported — Not reported — — —
Discretionary expulsions Suppressed — Suppressed — — —

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$13k$20k20182020202220242025
  • Miller Jordan MS
  • Parent district: San Benito CISD
  • Texas average
  • Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate

Spending per student · 2025

This school
$13,523
Selected comparison
$13,282

average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,777 rated schools reporting

+$241 vs similar economic context

For 2025, TEA reported $13,523 per student for this campus, $15,860 per student for its parent district, San Benito CISD, $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
YearMiller Jordan MSParent district: San Benito CISDTexas averageSelected comparison averageReportingselected comparison
2018$7,892$12,500$13,054$8,365 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,693 rated schools reporting
2019$8,367$12,928$13,108$8,376 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,716 rated schools reporting
2020$9,114$13,873$14,058$8,871 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,719 rated schools reporting
2021$5,809$13,746$14,797$9,719 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,721 rated schools reporting
2022$9,812$16,436$15,708$11,246 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,737 rated schools reporting
2023$10,484$15,972$16,792$11,879 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,758 rated schools reporting
2024$12,542$16,026$18,125$12,749 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,766 rated schools reporting
2025$13,523$15,860$18,972$13,282 average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,777 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
$64,984−$3,522 vs similar economic context
Teachers
41+1.2 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
10.7−4.0 vs similar economic context

Teaching experience

Miller Jordan MS

1 to 5 years: 23%6 to 10 years: 18.4%11 to 20 years: 40.4%21 to 30 years: 17.9%
  • 1 to 5 years 23%
  • 6 to 10 years 18.4%
  • 11 to 20 years 40.4%
  • 21 to 30 years 17.9%

Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,795 reporting for every category shown · 1,795 in full cohort

Beginning: 7.7%1 to 5 years: 27%6 to 10 years: 18.6%11 to 20 years: 27.1%21 to 30 years: 14.9%Over 30 years: 3.5%
  • Beginning 7.7%
  • 1 to 5 years 27%
  • 6 to 10 years 18.6%
  • 11 to 20 years 27.1%
  • 21 to 30 years 14.9%
  • Over 30 years 3.5%

Average students in a class

TEA average class size by grade or subject for Miller Jordan MS in 2024–25
Grade or subjectAverage students per classMiller Jordan MS · 2024–25Average students per classselected comparison
Grade 614.317.3
Secondary English13.115
Secondary languages other than English2118.1
Secondary math17.516.7
Secondary science1617.6
Secondary social studies17.517.6

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 031912042.