+0.3 ptsvs 82.7 average · 1,581 rated schools serving a similar economic context
Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
799 of 1,581tied with 61 others
Score vs region
+1.5 ptsvs 81.5 average · 142 rated schools in Region 08: Mt Pleasant
Region 08: Mt Pleasant placement
69 of 142tied with 1 other
Score vs county
+2.3 ptsvs 80.7 average · 42 rated schools in Bowie County
Bowie County placement
21 of 42among reporting schools
Score vs similar-size group
+2.5 ptsvs 80.5 average · 3,112 similarly sized rated schools
Similar size placement
1,337 of 3,112tied with 100 others
Score vs state
+1.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
Texas placement
3,601 of 7,646tied with 244 others
B83
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 77 in 2021-22. The current score is level with the 82.7 average for 1,581 rated schools serving a similar economic context.The current score is above the 81.5 average for 142 rated schools in Region 08: Mt Pleasant.The current score is above the 80.7 average for 42 rated schools in Bowie County.The current score is above the 80.5 average for 3,112 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
59%vs 54.8% avg · +4.2 pts
Masters
29%vs 24.2% avg · +4.8 pts
Among 1,532 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
Redwater Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — level with the 82.7 average for 1,581 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is up 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 799th of 1,581 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 61 others).
Redwater Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.5 average for 142 rated schools in Region 08: Mt Pleasant. It is up 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 69th of 142 rated schools in Region 08: Mt Pleasant (tied with 1 other).
Redwater Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.7 average for 42 rated schools in Bowie County. It is up 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 21st of 42 rated schools in Bowie County.
Redwater Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.5 average for 3,112 similarly sized rated schools. It is up 6 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 1,337th of 3,112 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 100 others).
Redwater Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 83 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools. It is up 6 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 77 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 Achievement85 B+2.3 vs similar economic context · 1,532 reporting
School Progress82 B+0.2 vs similar economic context · 1,528 reporting
Closing the Gaps79 C−1.0 vs similar economic context · 1,517 reporting
Relative Performance82 B+2.7 vs similar economic context · 1,528 reporting
Redwater Elem
Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,581 in cohort)
Domain scores
Domain
Score
Grade
Points to next grade
Student Achievement
85
B
5
School Progress
82
B
8
Closing the Gaps
79
C
1
Academic Growth
—
Not rated
—
Relative Performance
82
B
8
Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 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 Student Achievement (85), so
School Progress (82) is published above but does not enter the overall
score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 85.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
All Subjects
Approaches grade level80%+1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,532 reporting
Meets grade level59%+4 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,532 reporting
Masters grade level29%+5 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,532 reporting
Reading3 performance levels
Approaches grade level83%+3 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,530 reporting
Meets grade level58%−2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,530 reporting
Masters grade level25%−1 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,530 reporting
Math3 performance levels
Approaches grade level78%+2 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,525 reporting
Meets grade level61%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,525 reporting
Masters grade level33%+13 vs Similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,525 reporting
Approaches grade level
Meets grade level
Masters grade level
Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (1,581 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
325
Economically disadvantaged
46.7%−0.7 pts vs similar economic context
English learners
0.6%−11.8 pts vs similar economic context
Special education
19.5%+1.0 pts vs similar economic context
Attendance
94.6%−0.1 pts vs similar economic context
Chronically absent
12.9%−0.8 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Redwater Elem
African American 3.1%
Hispanic 5.3%
White 84.2%
American Indian 0.6%
Pacific Islander 0.3%
Two or More Races 6.5%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,581 reporting for every category shown · 1,581 in full cohort
African American 9.2%
Hispanic 39%
White 43.6%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 3.5%
Pacific Islander 0.2%
Two or More Races 4.3%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 142 reporting for every category shown · 142 in full cohort
African American 16.3%
Hispanic 21.3%
White 54.6%
American Indian 0.5%
Asian 0.7%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 6.5%
Selected comparison averageFor Bowie County · 42 reporting for every category shown · 42 in full cohort
African American 24.2%
Hispanic 11.4%
White 55.7%
American Indian 0.4%
Asian 0.9%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 7.3%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 3,112 reporting for every category shown · 3,112 in full cohort
African American 11%
Hispanic 53.8%
White 29.2%
American Indian 0.3%
Asian 2.3%
Pacific Islander 0.1%
Two or More Races 3.2%
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
323
Economically disadvantaged students
151
Emergent bilingual students
2
Special education students
63
Campus mobility · 2024–25
Mobile students
13
Students in TEA mobility denominator
217
TEA-published mobility rate
6%
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 325 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 4 (1.2%) from 2024–25.
Latest enrollment
325
2025–26
Change from 2024–25
−4
Decrease · −1.2%
Change since 2021–22
−6
Decrease · −1.8%
Enrollment in 2025–26
This school
325
Selected comparison
665.6
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,541 rated schools reporting
Student enrollment by school year for Redwater Elem
School year
Students enrolledRedwater Elem
Change from previous school year
Average enrollmentselected comparison
2021–22
331
First available year
662.2
2022–23
313
Decrease of 18 (5.4%)
667.6
2023–24
338
Increase of 25 (8.0%)
668
2024–25
329
Decrease of 9 (2.7%)
665.3
2025–26
325
Decrease of 4 (1.2%)
665.6
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
19
5.4% of cumulative year-end enrollment
Disciplinary actions
24
6.88 per 100 students
Cumulative year-end enrollment
349
2024–25
Share of students · 2024–25
This school
5.4%
Selected comparison
11.7%
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,231 rated schools reporting
−6.3 pts vs similar economic context
Actions per 100 students · 2024–25
This school
6.88
Selected comparison
25.7
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,322 rated schools reporting
−18.8 vs similar economic context
TEA all-discipline student and action counts by school year for Redwater Elem
School year
Cumulative enrollment
Studentsall discipline
Students% of enrollment
Actionsall discipline
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
2020–21
347
11
3.2%
12
3.46
9.5%
18
2021–22
344
Suppressed
—
Suppressed
—
—
—
2022–23
338
23
6.8%
30
8.88
12.0%
26.8
2023–24
348
16
4.6%
20
5.75
12.0%
27.4
2024–25
349
19
5.4%
24
6.88
11.7%
25.7
See 2024–25 discipline categories
TEA discipline categories for Redwater Elem in 2024–25
Category
Students
Students% of enrollment
Actions
Actionsper 100 students
Studentsselected comparison average %
Actionsselected comparison average per 100
All discipline
19
5.4%
24
6.88
11.7%
25.7
In-school suspensions
18
5.2%
23
6.59
10.6%
19.8
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.
Redwater Elem
Parent district: Redwater ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
This school
$8,843
Selected comparison
$11,916
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,551 rated schools reporting
−$3,073 vs similar economic context
For 2025, TEA reported $8,843 per student for this campus, $15,137 per student for its parent district, Redwater 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
Redwater Elem
Parent district: Redwater ISD
Texas average
Selected comparison average
Reportingselected comparison
2018
$6,750
$10,162
$13,054
$7,820
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,430 rated schools reporting
2019
$7,004
$11,031
$13,108
$8,001
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,449 rated schools reporting
2020
$8,036
$15,083
$14,058
$8,479
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,461 rated schools reporting
2021
$9,004
$14,212
$14,797
$8,895
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,480 rated schools reporting
2022
$9,857
$14,902
$15,708
$10,154
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,493 rated schools reporting
2023
$10,769
$17,036
$16,792
$10,611
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,510 rated schools reporting
2024
$9,358
$16,580
$18,125
$11,551
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,526 rated schools reporting
2025
$8,843
$15,137
$18,972
$11,916
average forschools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,551 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
$59,136−$7,960 vs similar economic context
Teachers
32−11.8 vs similar economic context
Students per staff member
10.3−10.1 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Redwater Elem
Beginning 5.4%
1 to 5 years 19.7%
6 to 10 years 15.9%
11 to 20 years 38.1%
21 to 30 years 20.6%
Selected comparison averageFor schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,581 reporting for every category shown · 1,581 in full cohort
Beginning 5.5%
1 to 5 years 23.9%
6 to 10 years 19.4%
11 to 20 years 29.9%
21 to 30 years 16.8%
Over 30 years 4.1%
Selected comparison averageFor Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 142 reporting for every category shown · 142 in full cohort
Beginning 5.6%
1 to 5 years 24.2%
6 to 10 years 18.4%
11 to 20 years 27.3%
21 to 30 years 17.2%
Over 30 years 6.5%
Selected comparison averageFor Bowie County · 42 reporting for every category shown · 42 in full cohort
Beginning 4.6%
1 to 5 years 22.2%
6 to 10 years 19.4%
11 to 20 years 28.9%
21 to 30 years 16.6%
Over 30 years 6.1%
Selected comparison averageFor similarly sized schools · 3,112 reporting for every category shown · 3,112 in full cohort
Beginning 6.2%
1 to 5 years 25.1%
6 to 10 years 18.7%
11 to 20 years 28.8%
21 to 30 years 16.9%
Over 30 years 4%
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 Redwater Elem in 2024–25
Grade or subject
Average students per classRedwater Elem · 2024–25
Average students per classselected comparison
Kindergarten
16.8
18
Grade 1
15.8
18.4
Grade 2
19.1
18.6
Grade 3
19.4
19.2
These are TEA's actual class-size averages for the grade or subject shown, not the student-to-teacher ratio. TEA reported 4 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 85 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.
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
1 measure
2of 38
Math — Masters
Bowie County · of the 38 that report this measure · tied with 2
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
2 measures
7of 38
All Subjects — Masters
Bowie County · of the 38 that report this measure
7of 38
Math — Meets
Bowie County · of the 38 that report this measure · tied with 1
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 019906101.