Recent movement
Overall score rose 2 points
80 to 82 2024-25 to 2025-26
- 82 is 2.4 points above the 79.6 average among 2,026 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
Traditional public school campus
Rowena Johnson Elem
Hopkins County · Region 08: Mt Pleasant · 301 students
Official school websiteSchool information and family resources
- Current score
- 82/1002025-26
- Change
- +10 ptssince 2021-22
- Score vs similar economic context
- +2.4 ptsvs 79.6 average · 2,026 rated schools serving a similar economic context
- Similar economic-disadvantage rate placement
- 847 of 2,026tied with 73 others
- Score vs region
- +0.5 ptsvs 81.5 average · 142 rated schools in Region 08: Mt Pleasant
- Region 08: Mt Pleasant placement
- 71 of 142tied with 6 others
- Score vs county
- +1.2 ptsvs 80.8 average · 15 rated schools in Hopkins County
- Hopkins County placement
- 7 of 15among reporting schools
- Score vs similar-size group
- +1.5 ptsvs 80.5 average · 2,718 similarly sized rated schools
- Similar size placement
- 1,259 of 2,718tied with 101 others
- Score vs state
- +0.7 ptsvs 81.3 average · 7,646 rated Texas schools
- Texas placement
- 3,846 of 7,646tied with 294 others
B82
At a glance
Under TEA’s current rules, the available rating history is moving up; under the rules in force back then it scored 63 in 2021-22. The current score is above the 79.6 average for 2,026 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 80.8 average for 15 rated schools in Hopkins County.The current score is above the 80.5 average for 2,718 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
Recent domain gain
Student Achievement rose 5 points
74 to 79 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureSTAAR result
All Subjects above similar-context averages at Meets and Masters
- Meets
- 55%vs 47.3% avg · +7.7 pts
- Masters
- 32%vs 19.2% avg · +12.8 pts
Among 1,917 schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate reporting this measure.
See the full measureRecent movement
Overall score rose 2 points
80 to 82 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureRecent domain gain
Student Achievement rose 5 points
74 to 79 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureSTAAR result
All Subjects above Region 08: Mt Pleasant averages at Meets and Masters
- Meets
- 55%vs 50.6% avg · +4.4 pts
- Masters
- 32%vs 19.3% avg · +12.7 pts
Among 129 schools in Region 08: Mt Pleasant reporting this measure.
See the full measureRecent movement
Overall score rose 2 points
80 to 82 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureRecent domain gain
Student Achievement rose 5 points
74 to 79 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureTop placement
All Subjects — Masters
32% Tied for 1st of 13 schools in Hopkins County reporting this measure · 2025-26 · 2 share this value
See the full measureRecent movement
Overall score rose 2 points
80 to 82 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureRecent domain gain
Student Achievement rose 5 points
74 to 79 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureSTAAR result
All Subjects above similar-size averages at Meets and Masters
- Meets
- 55%vs 49.6% avg · +5.4 pts
- Masters
- 32%vs 21.1% avg · +10.9 pts
Among 2,475 similarly sized schools reporting this measure.
See the full measureRecent movement
Overall score rose 2 points
80 to 82 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureRecent domain gain
Student Achievement rose 5 points
74 to 79 2024-25 to 2025-26
See the full measureSTAAR result
All Subjects above Texas averages at Meets and Masters
- Meets
- 55%vs 50.8% avg · +4.2 pts
- Masters
- 32%vs 22.8% avg · +9.2 pts
Among 7,260 Texas schools reporting this measure.
See the full measureSelected 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
Rowena Johnson Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 82 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 79.6 average for 2,026 rated schools serving a similar economic context. It is up 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 847th of 2,026 rated schools serving a similar economic context (tied with 73 others).
Rowena Johnson Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 82 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.5 average for 142 rated schools in Region 08: Mt Pleasant. It is up 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 71st of 142 rated schools in Region 08: Mt Pleasant (tied with 6 others).
Rowena Johnson Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 82 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.8 average for 15 rated schools in Hopkins County. It is up 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 7th of 15 rated schools in Hopkins County.
Rowena Johnson Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 82 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 80.5 average for 2,718 similarly sized rated schools. It is up 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 1,259th of 2,718 similarly sized rated schools (tied with 101 others).
Rowena Johnson Elem is rated B by TEA, scoring 82 out of 100 for 2025-26 — above the 81.3 average for 7,646 rated Texas schools. It is up 10 points since 2021-22.
Ranks 3,846th of 7,646 rated Texas schools (tied with 294 others).
Put the numbers in context
Compare with
Jump to a section
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
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 63 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
| Year | Rating | Score | Selected comparisonSimilar economic-disadvantage rate | StateTexas average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | B | 82 | 79.6 2,026 reporting | 81.3 7,646 reporting |
| 2024-25 | B | 80 | 79.3 2,004 reporting | 81.2 7,554 reporting |
| 2023-24 | C | 76 | 77.4 1,989 reporting | 78.9 7,466 reporting |
| 2022-23 | B | 83 | 78.0 1,956 reporting | 79.1 7,377 reporting |
| 2021-22 | C | 72 | 82.1 1,935 reporting | 83.7 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.
- Rowena Johnson Elem
- Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,026 in cohort)
| Domain | Score | Grade | Points to next grade |
|---|---|---|---|
| Student Achievement | 79 | C | 1 |
| School Progress | 84 | B | 6 |
| Closing the Gaps | 76 | C | 4 |
| Academic Growth | — | Not rated | — |
| Relative Performance | 84 | B | 6 |
Closest to moving up: Closing the Gaps, 4 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 (84), so Student Achievement (79) is published above but does not enter the overall score at all — gaining points there changes nothing until it passes 84.
Student outcomes
STAAR performance
- Approaches grade level
- Meets grade level
- Masters grade level
- Tick: Similar economic-disadvantage rate (2,026 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
- 301
- Economically disadvantaged
- 66.8%±0.0 pts vs similar economic context
- English learners
- 5.6%−13.3 pts vs similar economic context
- Special education
- 21.9%+3.0 pts vs similar economic context
- Attendance
- 94.7%+0.6 pts vs similar economic context
- Chronically absent
- 12.6%−4.4 pts vs similar economic context
Student demographics
Rowena Johnson Elem
- African American 14.6%
- Hispanic 18.9%
- White 54.5%
- Asian 1%
- Two or More Races 11%
Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,026 reporting for every category shown · 2,026 in full cohort
- African American 11.8%
- Hispanic 53.5%
- White 28.3%
- American Indian 0.3%
- Asian 2.2%
- Pacific Islander 0.2%
- Two or More Races 3.6%
Selected comparison average For 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 average For Hopkins County · 15 reporting for every category shown · 15 in full cohort
- African American 5.2%
- Hispanic 26.8%
- White 61.7%
- American Indian 0.5%
- Asian 0.5%
- Pacific Islander 0.3%
- Two or More Races 5.1%
Selected comparison average For similarly sized schools · 2,718 reporting for every category shown · 2,718 in full cohort
- African American 10.9%
- Hispanic 52.7%
- White 30.6%
- American Indian 0.3%
- Asian 2.2%
- Pacific Islander 0.1%
- Two or More Races 3.2%
Statewide average 7,646 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
- 301
- Economically disadvantaged students
- 201
- Emergent bilingual students
- 17
- Special education students
- 66
Campus mobility · 2024–25
- Mobile students
- 40
- Students in TEA mobility denominator
- 247
- TEA-published mobility rate
- 16.2%
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 301 students in 2025–26, a decrease of 5 (1.6%) from 2024–25.
- Latest enrollment
- 301
2025–26
- Change from 2024–25
- −5
Decrease · −1.6%
- Change since 2021–22
- 0
No change
Enrollment in 2025–26
- This school
- 301
- Selected comparison
- 635.8
| School year | Students enrolledRowena Johnson Elem | Change from previous school year | Average enrollmentselected comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021–22 | 301 | First available year | 647.1 |
| 2022–23 | 315 | Increase of 14 (4.7%) | 654.5 |
| 2023–24 | 327 | Increase of 12 (3.8%) | 653.4 |
| 2024–25 | 306 | Decrease of 21 (6.4%) | 650.6 |
| 2025–26 | 301 | Decrease of 5 (1.6%) | 635.8 |
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
- Not reported
Rate not available
- Disciplinary actions
- Not reported
Rate not available
- Cumulative year-end enrollment
- 323
2024–25
| School year | Cumulative enrollment | Studentsall discipline | Students% of enrollment | Actionsall discipline | Actionsper 100 students | Studentsselected comparison average % | Actionsselected comparison average per 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020–21 | 329 | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
| 2021–22 | 339 | Suppressed | — | Suppressed | — | — | — |
| 2022–23 | 345 | Suppressed | — | Suppressed | — | — | — |
| 2023–24 | 353 | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
| 2024–25 | 323 | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
See 2024–25 discipline categories
| Category | Students | Students% of enrollment | Actions | Actionsper 100 students | Studentsselected comparison average % | Actionsselected comparison average per 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All discipline | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
| In-school suspensions | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
| Out-of-school suspensions | Not reported | — | Not reported | — | — | — |
| 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.
- Rowena Johnson Elem
- Parent district: Sulphur Springs ISD
- Texas average
- Selected comparison: Similar economic-disadvantage rate
Spending per student · 2025
- This school
- $46,214
- Selected comparison
- $13,259
For 2025, TEA reported $46,214 per student for this campus, $21,394 per student for its parent district, Sulphur Springs ISD, $18,972 per student for the Texas average.
Not reported in this TEA campus finance record: TEA peer group.
View yearly spending figures
| Year | Rowena Johnson Elem | Parent district: Sulphur Springs ISD | Texas average | Selected comparison average | Reportingselected comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | $9,418 | $11,397 | $13,054 | $7,979 | average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,865 rated schools reporting |
| 2019 | $6,716 | $11,226 | $13,108 | $8,143 | average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,881 rated schools reporting |
| 2020 | $7,749 | $11,398 | $14,058 | $8,717 | average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,900 rated schools reporting |
| 2021 | $7,104 | $12,450 | $14,797 | $9,203 | average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,913 rated schools reporting |
| 2022 | $7,469 | $13,163 | $15,708 | $10,490 | average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,934 rated schools reporting |
| 2023 | $7,096 | $13,135 | $16,792 | $11,202 | average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,957 rated schools reporting |
| 2024 | $9,076 | $14,094 | $18,125 | $12,347 | average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 1,986 rated schools reporting |
| 2025 | $46,214 | $21,394 | $18,972 | $13,259 | average for schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,002 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
- $61,143−$5,323 vs similar economic context
- Teachers
- 25−17.9 vs similar economic context
- Students per staff member
- 12−1.9 vs similar economic context
Teaching experience
Rowena Johnson Elem
- 1 to 5 years 40%
- 6 to 10 years 28%
- 11 to 20 years 16%
- 21 to 30 years 16%
Selected comparison average For schools with a similar economic-disadvantage rate · 2,026 reporting for every category shown · 2,026 in full cohort
- Beginning 6.3%
- 1 to 5 years 26.5%
- 6 to 10 years 19%
- 11 to 20 years 27.9%
- 21 to 30 years 15.6%
- Over 30 years 4%
Selected comparison average For 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 average For Hopkins County · 15 reporting for every category shown · 15 in full cohort
- Beginning 3.5%
- 1 to 5 years 25.9%
- 6 to 10 years 18.6%
- 11 to 20 years 28.6%
- 21 to 30 years 17.7%
- Over 30 years 5.9%
Selected comparison average For similarly sized schools · 2,718 reporting for every category shown · 2,718 in full cohort
- Beginning 6.3%
- 1 to 5 years 25%
- 6 to 10 years 18.5%
- 11 to 20 years 28.7%
- 21 to 30 years 17%
- Over 30 years 4.2%
Statewide average 7,646 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
| Grade or subject | Average students per classRowena Johnson Elem · 2024–25 | Average students per classselected comparison |
|---|---|---|
| Kindergarten | 16.2 | 18 |
| Grade 1 | 16.7 | 18.2 |
| Grade 2 | 18.5 | 18.4 |
| Grade 3 | 15.5 | 18.7 |
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.
Source: TEA Texas Academic Performance Reports, fetched 24 August 2026.
Where this school ranks best
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.
#1 rankings
First-place results
2 measures
-
1of 15
Per-student spending
Hopkins County · of the 15 that report this measure
-
1of 13
All Subjects — Masters
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1
#2–3 rankings
Second- and third-place results
4 measures
-
2of 13
Reading — Masters
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1
-
2of 13
Math — Masters
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure
-
3of 13
All Subjects — Meets
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 2
-
3of 13
Math — Meets
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure
#4–10 rankings
Fourth- through tenth-place results
10 measures
-
4of 14
Chronically absent (lowest is best)
Hopkins County · of the 14 that report this measure
-
4of 13
Reading — Meets
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure
-
5of 14
Attendance
Hopkins County · of the 14 that report this measure
-
5of 13
School Progress
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1
-
5of 13
Relative Performance
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1
-
7of 15
Overall score
Hopkins County · of the 15 that report this measure
-
8of 13
Student Achievement
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1
-
8of 13
Closing the Gaps
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure
-
10of 13
All Subjects — Approaches
Hopkins County · of the 13 that report this measure · tied with 1
-
10of 13
Math — Approaches
Hopkins County · of the 13 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 112901104.